Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Hambartsumyan, 1:18-mj-00100. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180924729 Visitors: 9
Filed: Sep. 21, 2018
Latest Update: Sep. 21, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION and ORDER TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING AS TO DEFENDANT PHAPHONH BARBARA A. McAULIFFE , Magistrate Judge . BACKGROUND Defendant Phaphonh made an initial appearance on June 29, 2018 after her arrest on an arrest warrant issued in conjunction with a Criminal Complaint. On July 12, 2018, the United States provided initial, voluntary discovery to the counsel for defendant. On July 13, 2018 and August 8, 2018, pursuant to stipulations of the parties, judges of this Court have exte
More

STIPULATION and ORDER TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING AS TO DEFENDANT PHAPHONH

BACKGROUND

Defendant Phaphonh made an initial appearance on June 29, 2018 after her arrest on an arrest warrant issued in conjunction with a Criminal Complaint. On July 12, 2018, the United States provided initial, voluntary discovery to the counsel for defendant. On July 13, 2018 and August 8, 2018, pursuant to stipulations of the parties, judges of this Court have extended the time for the preliminary hearing. The preliminary hearing is currently scheduled for Septmber 27, 2018. (Dkt. 16, 18).

Since the time, the parties have continued to investigate the matter and explore resolution. The parties met on September 13 and have scheduled a final meeting for September 26-28 to discuss moving forward. After assessing the information exchanged in that meeting, the parties will resolve the matter or will move forward. A final continuance of two weeks will permit them to assess the information and follow up as necessary.

As noted above, this matter is currently scheduled for a preliminary hearing on September 27, 2018, and has already been continued from an earlier setting. Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(c) requires that preliminary hearing occur within twenty-one days, but Rule 5.1(d) also provides that the time limits may be extended "one or more times" with the defendant's consent and a showing of good cause. Here, the parties agree that there is good cause for the extension, as defense counsel require time to communicate with the defendant regarding discovery and because a potential pre-indictment resolution would represent an efficient resolution of the matter. The parties request that a preliminary hearing be re-set for October 11, 2018.

The parties also agree that time should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b), which requires an indictment within 30 days of a defendant's arrest, for defense preparation, plea negotiation, and continuity of counsel.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, and through their respective attorneys, that the preliminary hearing currently set for September 27, 2018 be continued to October 11, 2018. The parties agree to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act from September 27, 2018 to October 11, 2018, because the interest of the public and of the defendant in a public indictment and trial are outweighed by the need for defense preparation, plea negotiation, and continuity of counsel.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED that the preliminary hearing currently set for September 27, 2018 is continued to October 11, 2018 at 2:00 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Erica P. Grosjean. The period from September 27, 2018 to October 11, 2018 shall be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b). The Court finds that the interest of the public and of the defendant in a public indictment and trial are outweighed by the need for defense preparation, plea negotiation, and continuity of counsel.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer