Filed: Jan. 15, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 15, 2020
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 21, 2020. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until April 20, 2020, and to exclude
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 21, 2020. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until April 20, 2020, and to exclude t..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 21, 2020.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until April 20, 2020, and to exclude time between January 21, 2020, and April 20, 2020, 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 several hundreds of pages of investigative reports, thousands of hours of intercepted phone calls; and other related discovery relating to this case from several investigative agencies. This case was investigated for approximately 12 months. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to consult with his client, review the current charges, conducted investigation and research related to the charges, to review discovery, discuss potential resolutions with his client, and consider and prepare pretrial motions.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her 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 January 21, 2020 to April 20, 2020, 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: January 15, 2020 McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
/s/ JEFFREY A. SPIVAK
JEFFREY A. SPIVAK
Assistant United States Attorney
Dated: January 15, 2020 /s/ RICHARD BESHWATE
RICHARD BESHWATE
Counsel for Defendant
William Lee Muhammad
(as approved by email 1/15/2020)
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
