STIPULATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES LISTED TO VACATE THE STATUS CONFERENCE DATE AND RE-SET A MOTION HEARING DATE AND EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT AND PROPOSED ORDER
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.
The parties to which this stipulation effects who are listed below, the United States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorneys Richard Bender and Roger Yang and for these listed defendants:
7 — Thomas Johnson representing Jay Dupee; 8 — William E. Bonham representing Brock Enrico; 10 — William J. Portanova representing Steven Adgate; 11 — Danny D. Brace, Jr. representing Bryan Swiers; 12 — Clemente M. Jimenez representing Kyle Schmidt; 14 — Gregory W. Fox representing Charles Erickson; 15 — Olaf W. Hedberg representing Travis Olibas; 16 — David D. Fischer representing Jake Westerman; 17-Scott N. Cameron representing Justin McMillian; 19 — Carl E. Larson representing Frederick Laurens; 21 — Darryl A. Stallworth representing Richard Serrell; 22 — Robert J. Saria representing Kevin Kuester; 23 — Russell S. Humphrey representing Derek Winters; 24 — Clyde M. Blackmon representing Richard Reynolds; 25 — Michael Jason Lawley representing Nickolas Perry; 27 — James A. Bustamante representing Kevin Kirkpatrick; 28 — Philip A. Schnayerson representing Reginald Bell; 29 — Michael E. Hansen representing Michael Kelly; 31 — James J. Clark representing Robert Kennedy; 32 — Omar Figueroa representing Nicholas Ojeda and 20 — James R. Greiner representing Jason Siegfried, hereby agree and stipulate to the following1:
1 — By previous order, this matter was set for status on Thursday, October 1, 2015, see docket number 545.
2. By this Stipulation, the defendants listed herein now move to vacate the status conference set for Thursday, October 1, 2015, and to set the motion hearing date of Thursday, December 3, 2015 and to exclude time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act between Thursday, October 1, 2015 and Thursday, December 3, 2015, under Local Codes T-2 (complexity) and T-4 (time for adequate attorney preparation). The government has produced voluminous amounts of discovery, including, but not limited to, 6 CD's of wire taps and the potential for defense counsel to obtain on a 3 TB external hard drive video tape surveillance in this case and the government does not oppose this request. In addition, three co-defendants have now pled guilty, Todd Becerra (June 26, 2014, Docket # 460), Joseph Figlia (April 10, 2014, see docket entry # 435 and Shawn Thompson (January 9, 2014, see docket entry # 418), and one defendant has been dismissed by the government and this Court's Order, Joseph Mirante (October 27, 2014, see docket entry # 484) which requires all defense counsel to re-examine the discovery provided by the government in light of the two previous co-defendants pleading guilty and discuss this with their respective clients.
3. The listed parties agree and stipulate to the following and request the Court to find the following:
a. The government has produced discovery to date which consists of 5 (five) discovery CD's labeled Discovery Disk 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 and 6 (six) wire tape CD's labeled TT1, TT2, TT3, TT4, TT5 and TT6. The government has also made available for copying onto an external hard drive the pole camera evidence which defense counsel can obtain for reviewing with their respective clients. The government requested defense counsel to supply an external hard drive with 3 TB of capacity to accommodate the enormous volume of video tape recordings.
b. The government by way of letter dated November 30, 2012, addressed to all defense counsel, produced the following additional discovery contained on 4 (four) CD's: BATES numbers DD-007532 to DD-007570; Bates number DD-7571 (reproduction of wiretap-TT#1); Bates number DD-007572 (reproduction of wiretap-TT#2); Bates number DD-007573 (reproduction of wiretaps — TT#3, tt#4, TT#5, and TT#6).
c. The government has recently produced additional discovery pursuant to a Court order, see docket # 588 and transcript of the hearing docket # 594;
d. Counsel for the listed defendants need additional time, to review all of the discovery as listed herein, review the all the discovery with their respective clients, to conduct investigation into this case, do research, which includes legal research, in this case, and to otherwise do review and investigation, using due diligence, that this complex case requires;
e. Counsel for the listed defendants need additional time to discuss with their respective clients the legal implications and potential ramifications of the new discovery in light of the case in total;
f. There will be defense motions filed on or before October 8, 2015, which will exclude time from the speedy trial act until the ruling on the motion(s);
g. Counsel for the listed defendants represent that the failure to grant the above requested continuance would deny counsel for each individual defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
f. The government, based on all of the above, does not object to the continuance.
g. Based on the above stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and all the defendants in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
h. For the purpose of computing the time under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period from Thursday, October 1, 2015 to Thursday, December 3, 2015, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(A, (B)(ii) and (iv) corresponding to Local Codes T-2 and T-4, because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants' 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 all of the defendants 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.
Each attorney has granted James R. Greiner full authority to sign for each individual attorney.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
