1

DEFENDANT LACEY’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Paul J. Cambria, Jr. (NY Bar No.1430909, admitted pro hac vice)

Erin E. McCampbell (NY Bar No. 4480166, admitted pro hac vice)

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA LLP

42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 120

Buffalo, New York 14202

Telephone: (716) 849-1333

Facsimile: (716) 855-1580

pcambria@lglaw.com

emccampbell@lglaw.com

Attorneys for Michael Lacey

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff,

vs.

Michael Lacey, et al., 

 

 Defendants.

NO. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB

DEFENDANT MICHAEL LACEY’S 

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM IN 

SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL

(Oral argument requested)

Defendant Michael Lacey, by and through his undersigned counsel, files the instant 

supplemental memorandum to the Motion to Continue Trial (“Motion,” Doc. 990) filed by 

Defendants Michael Lacey, James Larkin, John Brunst, Scott Spear, Andrew Padilla, and Joye Vaught

(“Defendants”).

On May 29, 2020, Defendants filed the Motion, requesting that this Court continue the August 

17, 2020 trial start date because proceeding to trial as scheduled, during this highly contaigious and 

dangerous coronavirus pandemic, would risk the safety of all trial participants and would deprive the 

Defendants of numerous constitutional rights. On June 19, 2020, Defendants’ filed their reply brief, 

redoubling their request for the continuance because, since the filing of the Motion, Arizona had 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1026 Filed 06/24/20 Page 1 of 3
2

DEFENDANT LACEY’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

become a new coronavirus hotspot, with the Arizona Department of Health Services reporting a 

sharp uptick in new cases, and hospitals expressing alarm about whether they would have sufficient 

staff, supplies, and capacity in the coming weeks. (See “Reply,” Doc. 1025.) 

In the few days that have lapsed since the Defendants filed their Reply, there has been a 

material development that impacts Mr. Lacey and his trial counsel. In particular, New York Governor 

Andrew Cuomo announced that all travelers from Arizona to New York would be required to 

quarantine for fourteen days upon arrival in New York.1 The failure to comply with this order could 

result in a fine of up to $10,000.2 Because Mr. Lacey’s trial counsel reside in New York, trial counsel 

will be unable to travel to and from Arizona for pre-trial hearings, witness interviews and preparations, 

and other pretrial matters without going into quarantine for fourteen days upon return to New York. 

A two-week quarantine after any visit to Arizona would be very disruptive to trial counsel’s practice

and woud be a serious impediment to trial preparation. Further, the skyrocketing Arizona infection 

rates, combined with trial counsel’s quarantine, would place trial counsel’s family at a heightened risk 

for infection. 

More importantly, as a practical matter, trial counsel also will be unable to meet with Mr. Lacey 

to prepare for trial. Mr. Lacey cannot travel to New York to meet with his trial counsel in New York 

without quarantining for fourteen days before the meeting and trial counsel cannot travel to Arizona 

to meet in Arizona without quarantining for fourteen days upon return to New York. This new travel 

restriction creates an indefinite and unworkable barrier to trial preparation. Indeed, the travel order, 

when coupled with this Court’s protective order, impedes the ability of trial counsel to review critical 

Jencks Act material with Mr. Lacey because Mr. Lacey is only allowed to review that material in the 

presence of trial counsel. 

Procceding to trial in August, while this travel order is in force during the critical weeks before 

the commencement of trial, will deprive Mr. Lacey of his Sixth Amendment rights. Moreover, the 

travel restriction also would effectively preclude Mr. Lacey’s trial counsel from returning to New York 

 1 See The New York Times, N.Y. Roundup, New York will require certain out-of-state travelers to 

quarantine upon arrival (June 24, 2020), available at: https://www.nytimes.com

/2020/06/24/world/coronavirus-updates.html#link-5520fc26 (last visited June 24, 2020).

2 See id.

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1026 Filed 06/24/20 Page 2 of 3
3

DEFENDANT LACEY’S SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

for three months during the course of the trial—which would create serious hardships for Mr. Lacey’s 

trial counsel. 

CONCLUSION

For all the reasons set forth in Defendants’ Motion and Reply, as well as this Supplemental 

Memorandum, Mr. Lacey respectfully requests that this Court grant the Motion. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 24th day of June, 2020, 

Paul J. Cambria, Jr.

Erin E. McCampbell

LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA LLP

By: /s/ Paul J. Cambria, Jr. 

Paul J. Cambria, Jr.

Attorneys for Michael Lacey

On June 24, 2020, a PDF version

of this document was filed with

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF

System for filing and for Transmittal

Of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the

Following CM/ECF registrants:

Kevin Rapp, kevin.rapp@usdoj.gov

Reginald Jones, reginald.jones4@usdoj.gov 

Peter Kozinets, peter.kozinets@usdoj.gov

John Kucera, john.kucera@usdoj.gov 

Margaret Perlmeter, margaret.perlmeter@usdoj.gov 

Andrew Stone, andrew.stone@usdoj.gov

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1026 Filed 06/24/20 Page 3 of 3