Filed: Jun. 17, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 17, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE AND EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 18, 2019, and time was excluded through that date. 2. By this stipulation, the defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between June 18, 2019, and July 16, 2019, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipu
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE AND EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 18, 2019, and time was excluded through that date. 2. By this stipulation, the defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between June 18, 2019, and July 16, 2019, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipul..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE AND EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 18, 2019, and time was excluded through that date.
2. By this stipulation, the defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between June 18, 2019, and July 16, 2019, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has produced to defense counsel over 2000 pages of discovery, as well as a significant amount of audio and video. The government produced three additional disks on April 17, 2019.
b) The defendants were arraigned on the Superseding Indictment on November 14, 2018.
c) Counsel for all three defendants require additional time to review the discovery, conduct interviews and other investigation, gather additional information about potential mitigating factors, and consult with their clients about the case.
d) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
e) The government does not object to the continuance.
f) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
g) For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of June 18, 2019, to July 16, 2019, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial must commence.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: June 17, 2019 McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
MIRIAM R. HINMAN
Assistant United States Attorney
Dated: June 17, 2019 TASHA CHALFANT
Counsel for Defendant
Domingo Ene
Dated: June 17, 2019 NOA OREN
Counsel for Defendant
Joshua Hopoi
Dated: June 17, 2019 LINDA PARISI
Counsel for Defendant
Raymond Su
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
