Filed: Nov. 09, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 09, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER STANLEY A. BOONE , 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 November 13, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 11, 2017, and to excl
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER STANLEY A. BOONE , 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 November 13, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 11, 2017, and to exclu..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
STANLEY A. BOONE, 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 November 13, 2017.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 11, 2017, and to exclude time between November 13, 2017, and December 11, 2017, 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 has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendant desires additional to review the discovery, discuss the case with his client, discuss potential resolution with the government, and to evaluate the status of the co-defendant's competency (set for hearing on 12/4/2017 before Judge Drozd) and the impact of that proceeding on this defendant's case.
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 November 13, 2017 to December 11, 2017, 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.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED. Counsel are reminded that the use of "T4" as a basis for excludable time is not a legal basis to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act.
