The retrial of former Penn State wrestler Jean Celestin, who was previously convicted of sexual assault, may be postponed in lieu of a motion filed by his defense lawyer to continue the trial at a later date.

Celestin's lawyer, Eric Linhardt, filed a motion Nov. 17 to continue Celestin's retrial at another date because, according to court documents, there is not enough time for a "competent and effective" pretrial investigation.

"It is going to take a substantial amount of time to adequately prepare a defense in a major felony case," Linhardt said.

Celestin was convicted of sexually assaulting a 20-year-old female Penn State student in 1999. He was sentenced to two to four years in prison and was ordered to register as a sex offender.

Celestin appealed to the Superior Court, claiming he had ineffective assistance at trial. The Superior Court deemed his trial lawyer, Pittsburgh attorney Mark Lancaster, ineffective, and the court overturned Celestin's conviction.

Celestin was given a $25,000 unsecured bail and was released from Centre County prison Nov. 1.

Linhardt said he asked for the retrial to be continued to the next term of court, which would put the trial in February.

At this time, Celestin's retrial is scheduled for Jan. 9 and 10.

The motion states that Linhardt was not Celestin's counsel in the previous trial and, therefore, does not have the preparation time necessary to represent Celestin by the January trial dates.

According to court documents, Linhardt must locate and interview a number of witnesses, along with acquiring expert testimony, both of which could not be adequately done before the scheduled trial date, which is less than 60 days away.

It is also expected that there will be expert testimony at the trial, but the January trial dates would jeopardize the preparation of the experts, according to court documents.

The motion also states that the district attorney's office would not have enough time to review the defendant's expert reports and consult its own experts.

According to court documents, the consequence of not continuing the trial at a later date may be "further appeals, further claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and a third trial of this matter."

Linhardt said he does not know if there will be a hearing to consider the motion or if a judge will review the motion and issue a ruling out of court.

Lance Marshall, Centre County assistant district attorney, said he plans to oppose the motion to continue the trial at another date.

"It might mean he has to rearrange his schedule, and he may not enjoy Christmas as much, but that's what we signed up to do -- that's our job," Marshall said.

Marshall said that while he does see some merit in Linhardt's claims, he still thinks the case should go to trial in January.

"The victim wants the case to be done with as soon as possible, as does the commonwealth," Marshall said. "Justice delayed is justice denied."