Filed: Dec. 11, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 11, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The parties appeared before the Court on December 8, 2017, for a status conference. As stated on the record, the government has produced initial discovery. The parties continue to confer on a proposed protective order that, pursuant to the Court's approval, would govern production of certain audio and video recordings relating to the underlying investigation of the case. The Cou
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The parties appeared before the Court on December 8, 2017, for a status conference. As stated on the record, the government has produced initial discovery. The parties continue to confer on a proposed protective order that, pursuant to the Court's approval, would govern production of certain audio and video recordings relating to the underlying investigation of the case. The Cour..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
JON S. TIGAR, District Judge.
The parties appeared before the Court on December 8, 2017, for a status conference. As stated on the record, the government has produced initial discovery. The parties continue to confer on a proposed protective order that, pursuant to the Court's approval, would govern production of certain audio and video recordings relating to the underlying investigation of the case. The Court set a deadline of January 12, 2018, for the parties to file a joint stipulated protective order, file conflicting proposals for a protective order, or for the government to move for a protective order. The government represented that in the meantime, the underlying discovery is available for viewing at the United States Attorney's Office, and defense counsel anticipates reviewing these recordings shortly. Finally, the parties are in discussions regarding a potential disposition. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court scheduled a further status conference for February 9, 2018 at which point the parties anticipate either a change in plea or requesting a trial date.
Because of the outstanding discovery, and for the reasons stated on the record, the parties agree and jointly request that the time between December 8, 2017, and February 9, 2018, should be excluded in order to provide reasonable time necessary for the continuity and effective preparation of counsel, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties agree that the ends of justice are served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Based on the reasons provided in the stipulation of the parties above, and stated on the record on December 8, 2017, the Court hereby FINDS that for adequate preparation of the case by all parties and continuity of counsel, and in the interest of justice, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), an exclusion of time is warranted under the Speedy Trial Act. Based on these findings, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT time is excluded until February 9, 2018.
