Filed: Jun. 03, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 03, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 3, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 29, 2016, and to exclude time between June 3, 2016, and July 29, 2016, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) The govern
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 3, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 29, 2016, and to exclude time between June 3, 2016, and July 29, 2016, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) The governm..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 3, 2016.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 29, 2016, and to exclude time between June 3, 2016, and July 29, 2016, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case includes over 500 pages of reports and documents. This discovery has been provided directly to defense counsel. Additionally, counsel for the defendants have provided defense discovery to the United States.
b) Counsel for defendants desire additional time to consult with their clients, conduct investigation related to the charges and potential defenses at trial, review the discovery, and otherwise prepare for trial. Additionally, this case involves conducted that occurred in at least three federal judicial districts.
c) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) The government does not object to the continuance.
e) 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.
f) 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 3, 2016 to July 29, 2016, 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 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 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
[PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
