Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Godfrey, 2:07-cr-00022-MCE-1. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160802a34 Visitors: 17
Filed: Aug. 01, 2016
Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . Defendant Derek Godfrey, by and through Linda M. Parisi, his counsel of record, and plaintiff, by and through its counsel, Matthew G. Morris, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 28, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status conference until September 8, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. and to excl
More

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER

Defendant Derek Godfrey, by and through Linda M. Parisi, his counsel of record, and plaintiff, by and through its counsel, Matthew G. Morris, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 28, 2016.

2. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status conference until September 8, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. and to exclude time between July 28, 2016 and September 8, 2016 and under Local Code T4. The United States does not oppose this request.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

a. The United States Attorney and Counsel for Mr. Godfrey need additional time to consult, to complete ongoing investigation and review discovery.

b. Counsel for defendant Mr. Godfrey believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

d. The United States Attorney agrees to the continuance.

e. All counsel agrees to the continuance.

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 July 28, 2016 and September 8, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 316l(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local CodeT4] 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.

ORDER

Based on the reasons set forth in the stipulation of the parties filed on July 19, 2016, and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference currently set for July 28, 2016, be vacated and that a status conference be set for September 8, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the parties' July 19, 2016 stipulation, the time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act is excluded during the time period of July 19, 2016 and September 8, 2016 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code 25.

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