Filed: Mar. 04, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 04, 2020
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND RESET MOTIONS SCHEDULE; FINDINGS AND ORDER DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for trial on April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the trial until September 29, 2020, and to exclude time between April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for, and September 29, 2020. 3. The parties agre
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND RESET MOTIONS SCHEDULE; FINDINGS AND ORDER DALE A. DROZD , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for trial on April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the trial until September 29, 2020, and to exclude time between April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for, and September 29, 2020. 3. The parties agree..
More
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL AND RESET MOTIONS SCHEDULE; FINDINGS AND ORDER
DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for trial on April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the trial until September 29, 2020, and to exclude time between April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for, and September 29, 2020.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has represented that the discovery in this case is voluminous. To date, the government has produced over 2,500 pages of wiretap applications and orders; 75 reports from the Fresno Sheriff's Office and the California Department of Justice; wiretap data, pen register data, and precise location data totaling 186,000 files or 45 gigabytes of data; search warrant photos for multiple locations, totaling over 8 gigabytes of data; surveillance footage; criminal histories; interview reports and audio; almost 900 reports from FBI, HSI, and California Department of Justice; search warrants; forensic reports (as the forensic reports are completed); approximately 75 cell phone reports, consisting of half a terabyte of data; returns from Facebook search warrants; and additional translations and transcriptions of intercepted calls and messages.
b) Counsel for the defendants and the government desire additional time to continue to review discovery, discuss the charges with their clients, conduct research related to the charges, discuss potential resolutions with their clients, prepare pretrial motions, and otherwise prepare for trial.
c) Counsel for the defendants and the government believe that a continuance will provide them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) 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. Therefore, 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 April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for to September 29, 2020, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at the parties' 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.
e) In addition, this case involves nine remaining defendants and four charges— including a multi-year drug conspiracy and two charges of violent crime in aid of racketeering— and wiretaps of over 30 different phones and twenty different Facebook accounts. The government estimates that it will take at least nine trial days to try this case, and the trial will involve several hundreds of intercepted messages and calls, testimony from dozens of witnesses, multiple expert witnesses, and surveillance from several different days in different parts of the state.
f) Counsel for the defendants and the government therefore believe that this case is so complex, due to the number of defendants and the nature of the prosecution that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation in the time allotted by the Speedy Trial Act. Therefore, 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 April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for to September 29, 2020, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(ii) because it results from a continuance granted by the Court in a case that is so complex due to the number of defendants and the nature of the prosecution that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation in the time allotted by the Speedy Trial Act, and therefore 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.
5. In light of the new trial date, the parties hereby stipulate to the following revised schedule:
a) All motions, including substantive motions and motions in limine, shall be filed no later than May 15, 2020.
b) Opposition to motions shall be filed no later than May 29, 2020.
c) Replies shall be filed no later than June 5, 2020.
d) The Court will hold a hearing on all motions on June 12, 2020, at 8:30 a.m.
e) Parties shall disclose and provide expert notices as required by Rule 16 no later than August 14, 2020.
6. The Trial Setting Hearing on March 6, 2020, and the Motions Hearing on April 3, 2020, are vacated.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
Dated: March 3, 2020 MCGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
/s/ROSS PEARSON
ROSS PEARSON
Assistant United States Attorney
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/E. MARSHALL HODGKINS, III
E. MARSHALL HODGKINS,
III
Counsel for Defendant
FRANCISCO LIZANO
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/BARBARA O'NEILL
BARBARA O'NEILL
Counsel for Defendant
JEFFERSON GUEVARA
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/MICHAEL J. AED
MICHAEL J. AED
Counsel for Defendant
EVER MEMBRENO
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/DALE A. BLICKENSTAFF
DALE A. BLICKENSTAFF
Counsel for Defendant
EDGAR TORRES-AMADOR
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/W. SCOTT QUINLAN
W. SCOTT QUINLAN
Counsel for Defendant
LORENZO AMADOR
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/ROGER D. WILSON
ROGER D. WILSON
Counsel for Defendant
JOSE WILSON NAVARETTE-MENDEZ
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/JOHN F. GARLAND
JOHN F. GARLAND
Counsel for Defendant
DENIS RODOLFO ALFARO-TORRES
(authorized by phone on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 4, 2020 /s/NICHOLAS CAPOZZI
NICHOLAS CAPOZZI
Counsel for Defendant
SANTOS BONILLA
(authorized by phone on March
4, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/ROGER S. BONAKDAR
ROGER S. BONAKDAR
Counsel for Defendant
HENRY BONILLA
(authorized by email on March
3, 2020)
Dated: March 3, 2020 /s/DANIEL L. HARRALSON
DANIEL L. HARRALSON
Counsel for Defendant
CHRISTIAN HIDALGO
(authorized by email on M)
ORDER
Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the April 14, 2020 trial date is vacated and the jury trial is rescheduled for September 29, 2020 at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom No. 4. All other dates are rescheduled as set forth in the parties' stipulation. Time is excluded from the date of this order to September 29, 2020 pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
