## United States Court of App eals
F O R T H E E I G H T H

C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 1- 26 60 No. 11 -2 66 2

__ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca, *
* App el le e, * App eal fro m th e Uni te d S ta te s * Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r th e v. * Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta

. * Tho m as R. Kell ey , * [UNPUBLISHED]
* App el la nt

. *

__ __ __ __ __ _ Su bm it te d: May 14, 2 01 2 Fi le d: Ju ne 6, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re MUR PHY, BENTON, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _ PER CURI AM.

Afte r a fo ur -m on th , mult i-s ta te se arch , fed eral ag en ts arre st ed Tho m as R. Kell ey in Mi nn es ot a fo r fai lu re to ap pe ar at hi s se nt en ci ng he ari ng

. A jury co nv ic te d hi m of vi ol at in g 18 U.S.C. §§ 31 46 (a)( 1) , 31 46 (b )(1 )(A)(i ), an d 31 46 (b )(2 ). Kell ey ap pe al s th e de ni al of hi s m ot io ns fo r co nt in ua nc e an d a jud gm en t of acq ui tt al

. Thi s
co ur t af fir m s.On hi s tri al da te , Kell ey , pr o se , m ov ed fo r a co nt in ua nc e as pa rt of hi s

“ Mo ti o ns in Lim in e.” The di st ric t co ur t ha s “ br oa d di sc ret io n” to gr an t or de ny a
co nt in ua nc e req ue st , an d a co nt in ua nce re qui re s a “ co m pe ll in g reas on .” Uni te d St at es

v. Jo ne s , 64 3 F.3 d 2 7 5 , 27 7 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ). A de ni al is rev ie wed fo r an ab us e of di sc ret io n. Uni te d St at es v. Jo os , 63 8 F.3 d 58 1, 5 8 6 ( 8 t h C i r. 20 11 ) (ev al ua ti ng
co un se l’s p r ep arat io n ti m e, co un se l’s pr ep ared ne ss (as ev id en ced by co un se l’s

co nd uc t at tri al ), an d wh et he r th e d en ia l p reju di ced th e d efen da nt ).

Kell ey ’s fir st ba si s fo r a co nt in ua nc e was to em pl oy a “ co ns ti tu ti on al la wy er.” Ora l l y, h e c la im ed in ad eq ua te ti m e to pe rs on al ly rev ie w 1,5 00 pa ge s of le ga l

m at eri al s an d co nf

er e n c e wit h hi s st an db y co un se l. Kell ey ha d th ree m on th s to pr ep are fo r tri al wit h th e as si st an ce of st an db y co un se l. A week be fo re tri al , Kell ey di sc ha rg ed a pr ev io us st an db y co un se l, who was i m

m ed ia te ly repl aced . Kell ey ha s
no t sh own th at he an d hi s st an db y co un se l were no t su ffi ci en tl y pr ep ared , as each pa rti ci pa te d i n Kel le y ’s def en se at t ria l.

Kell ey ’s se co nd ba si s fo r a co nt in ua nc e was th at he ha d n o t r e c e i ve d la w
en fo rcem en t rep or ts ab ou t t h e se arch an d se iz ur e of hi s pr op ert y

. Kell ey no te s hi s pr ev io us st an db y co un se l m ay ha ve rece iv e d t h e r e po rts

. The go ve rn m en t no te s Kell ey ha d acce ss to al l di sc ov erab l e mat eri al s, bu t th e reco rd do es no t ex pl ic it ly in di cat e h is rece ip t o f th e rep or ts

.

Kell ey di d no t pr es en t a co m pe ll in g reas on fo r de la y , an d he ha s no t sh own th at t h e d is tri ct co ur t’s de ni al was “ so eg reg io us ” as to be “ fu nd am en ta ll y un fai r

. ” S e e U n i t e d St at es v. Bon il la -S ic il ia no , 64 3 F.3 d 58 9, 59 1 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ). The di st r i c t

co ur t di d n ot ab us e it s d is cret io n i n d en y in g h is co nt in ua nc e. 1

Th e Hon or ab le Lawren ce L. Pi ers ol , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e f o r t h e 1 Dis tri ct of S ou th Dako ta , Sou th ern Div is io n.
-2

-K e ll ey m ov ed fo r a jud gm en t of acq ui tt al , cl ai m in g th e go ve rn m en t di d n o t

pr ov e hi s kn owi ng an d wil lfu l fai lu re to ap pe ar. Den ia l of th at m ot io n i s r e vi ewed de no vo

. Uni te d St at es v. El Her man , 58 3 F.3 d 57 6, 57 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ). Thi s co ur t

rev ers es on ly if th e ev id en ce, vi ewed m os t fav or ab ly to th e ve rd ic t, co ul d no t su pp or t th e v erd ic t. Uni te d S ta te s v. Wor man , 62 2 F .3d 96 9, 9 77 (8t h C ir. 2 01 0)

.

Kell ey ’s sen te nc in g h eari ng was sc he du le d fo r Aug us t 23 , 20 10 . On Aug us t 18 , he ha nd -d el iv ered se ve ral do cu m en ts to th e co ur t cl erk

. Kell ey sa id he ex pe ct ed

no ti ce of a ne w se nt en ci ng da te be cau se he ha d rai s e d i s su es warra nt in g po st p o n e men t

. Learn in g of th e warra nt fo r hi s arre st , Kell ey cl ai m s he fle d to Mi nn es ot a in fear

.

The ev id en ce su pp or ts a fin di ng th at Kell ey kn owi ng ly an d wil lfu ll y fai le d to ap pe ar. On Ju ne 29 , th e pa ral eg al to hi s st an db y co un se l e-m ai le d Kell ey ’s acco un t ab ou t th e se nt en ci ng da te

. Tha t e-m ai l was fo rward ed fro m Kell ey ’s acco un t wit h an

“ I’m free an ot he r 20 da y s ! ” mes sa ge si gn ed by “ T.” Mo reo ve r, st an db y co un se l te st ifi ed th at he co m

m un ic at ed wit h Kell ey vi a t h a t a c c o u nt aft er Ju ne 29

. W he n Kell e y f le d to ru ral Mi nn es ot a, he li ve d in a m ot or ho m e pa rk ed in si de a Quo ns et

type st ru ct ur e. The re, la w e nf or cem en t fo un d l et te rs an d a ne wsp ap er art ic le ab ou t hi s fai lu re to ap pe ar. K e l l e y a l s o ha d a pr in to ut of a wan te d po st er in di cat in g hi s fu gi ti ve st at us

. Acco rd in g to th e reco rd , Kell ey di d no t try to in fo rm th e co ur t of hi s lo cat io n o r ex pl ai n h is fai lu re t o a pp ear.

The jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t i s af fir m ed

. Se e 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _

-3

-