Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Buhbut, 2:17-cr-00232-GEB. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190614737 Visitors: 11
Filed: Jun. 13, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 13, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. , District Judge . Defendant Eran Buhbut, by and through his counsel of record, Randy Sue Pollock, and Raz Razla, by and through his counsel George Mgdesyan, hereby request that the status conference presently set for June 14, 2019, be rescheduled for July 26, 2019. This extension is at the request of both defense counsel so that they can have additional time to review the discovery and meet and confer with
More

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

Defendant Eran Buhbut, by and through his counsel of record, Randy Sue Pollock, and Raz Razla, by and through his counsel George Mgdesyan, hereby request that the status conference presently set for June 14, 2019, be rescheduled for July 26, 2019. This extension is at the request of both defense counsel so that they can have additional time to review the discovery and meet and confer with their clients and the prosecutor in order to reach a resolution of this case. As to Mr. Buhbut, counsel is meeting with an immigration attorney regarding the immigration consequences of a disposition in this case.

1. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) within which trial must commence, the time period of June 14, 2019 to July 26, 2019, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4 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. 2. 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. /s/ RANDY SUE POLLOCK RANDY SUE POLLOCK Counsel for Defendant ERAN BUHBUT /s/ GEORGE GEVORK MGDESYAN GEORGE GEVORK MGDESYAN Counsel for Defendant RAZ RAZLA Dated: June 12, 2019. /s/MIRIAM HINMAN MIRIAM HINMAN Assistant United States Attorney

ORDER

The Court hereby grants the motion submitted by Defendants Eran Buhbut and Raz Razla. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) within which trial must commence, the time period from June 14, 2019 to July 26, 2019, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4 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. 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 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