To offer an analogy…
I’m on a serious felony case. The state’s offer is 30 years. The judge, who runs a right ship, has set a trial date for next week.
The case concerns computers. At a deposition, the lead detective mentioned “chat logs”, which I had not received.
I’ve been asking the state for them, and for the longest time I was told that they could only be found by reviewing a computer at the prosecutor’s office.
Just last week I was told there was actually a prinout of these chats: about 5,000 pages worth.
So the judge has postponed the trial. And he hasn’t reset it; instead, he set a status check for 30 days.
But he warned me (in a way that only a seasoned judge with a soft southern drawl can do) that I’ve been on this case since the beginning, and it’s 13 months old, so I better be ready to discuss the trial when we return.
This type of delay insulates the case on appeal from some sort of later claim of prejudice, while also ensuring that the case isn’t languishing without some action.
(And, for what it’s worth, there was no talk of dismissing the indictment against my client. The remedy for newly produced evidence is more time).
If the judge postponed the Trump case to mid April, he is going to expect significant progress on the issue. Meaning, the parties better be ready to reset the trial, or have some tangible explanation for why they need yet more time before that happens.
At this pace, I predict the trial starts in June (unless this judge gets caught in the trap of requiring written briefs followed by scheduled hearings on every issue the defense can conceivably file).