STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, District Judge.

It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through TODD LERAS, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and defendant OSCAR GOMEZ GORIBALDO by and through his counsel, BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, Assistant Federal Defender and defendant EVARISTO ARREOLA-VENTURA, by and through his attorney, DINA L. SANTOS, that the status conference set for Tuesday, April 23, 2013, be continued to Tuesday, June 11, 2013, at 9:15 a.m., for status conference.

The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendant, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case.

It is further stipulated that the time period from the date of this stipulation, through and including the date of the new status conference, June 11, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv)and Local Code T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare], and that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

ORDER

Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. It is hereby ordered that the presently set April 23, 2013, status conference shall be continued to June 11, 2013, at 9:15 a.m. It is further ordered that the time period from the date of the parties' stipulation, through and including the date of the new status conference hearing, June 11, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare].

Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.