Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Nava, 17-064 JAM. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190626924 Visitors: 25
Filed: Jun. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 24, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE NO. AND EXCLUDING TIME JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney, Jason Hitt, Counsel for Plaintiff, and attorneys Clemente M. Jim nez, Counsel for Defendant Cesar Erendira Nava; Dustin Johnson, Counsel for Defendant Georgina Lopez Quintero; Michael Jason Lawley, Counsel for Defendant Alfonso Rivera, Jr.; Chris Cosca, Counsel for Defendant Ruth Kellner; and Hannah Labaree, Co
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE NO. AND EXCLUDING TIME

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney, Jason Hitt, Counsel for Plaintiff, and attorneys Clemente M. Jiménez, Counsel for Defendant Cesar Erendira Nava; Dustin Johnson, Counsel for Defendant Georgina Lopez Quintero; Michael Jason Lawley, Counsel for Defendant Alfonso Rivera, Jr.; Chris Cosca, Counsel for Defendant Ruth Kellner; and Hannah Labaree, Counsel for Defendant Rodney Sharp, that the status conference in this matter currently scheduled for June 25, 2019, at 9:15 a.m. be vacated, and the matter be continued to this court's criminal calendar on August 20, 2019, at 9:15 a.m. for further status conference. This stipulation does not include Defendant Gary Roberts.

Discovery in this case consists of over 1,700 pages of reports; recordings and transcripts of wiretaps from five target lines; and pole camera data spanning twenty-four 06/24/19 hours a day for approximately a month. In addition, the government has indicated that additional discovery is forthcoming.

The parties will require additional time to continue review of discovery, conduct necessary investigation, prepare for trial, and confer with their respective clients.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161 et seq. be excluded from computation of time pursuant to Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), (Local code T-4), and that the ends of justice served in granting the continuance and allowing the defendant further time to prepare outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial.

DATED: June 24, 2019 /S/ Jason Hitt McGREGOR SCOTT by JASON HITT Attorney for Plaintiff /S/ Clemente M. Jiménez CLEMENTE M. JIMÉNEZ Attorney for Cesar Erendira Nava /S/ Dustin Johnson DUSTIN JOHNSON Attorney for Georgina Lopez Quintero /S/ Michael Jason Lawley MICHAEL JASON LAWLEY Attorney for Alfonso Rivera, Jr. /S/ Chris Cosca CHRIS COSCA Attorney for Ruth Kellner /S/ Hannah Labaree HANNAH LABAREE Attorney for Rodney Sharp

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED, that the status conference in the above-entitled matter, scheduled for June 25, 2019, at 9:15 a.m., be vacated and the matter continued for further status conference on August 20, 2019, at 9:15 a.m. The Court finds that time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded through that date in order to afford counsel reasonable time to prepare. Based on the parties' representations, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants to a speedy trial.

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