Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. KHAN, 2:14-CR-00169-GEB. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160322886 Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 18, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 18, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants Mohammad Khan and Jasvir Kaur, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 18, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now seek to move the status hearing to May 27, 2016. The defendants seek to exclude time under Local
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants Mohammad Khan and Jasvir Kaur, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 18, 2016.

2. By this stipulation, defendants now seek to move the status hearing to May 27, 2016. The defendants seek to exclude time under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

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

a. On or about October 1, 2015 the grand jury returned a superseding indictment. The superseding indictment adds Jasvir Kaur as a defendant in this case. Ms. Kaur was arraigned on October 6, 2015.

b. The government has forwarded discovery to counsel for Ms. Kaur. The discovery is voluminous.

c. An exclusion of time is appropriate as to Misters Khan and Johal in order to provide for continuity of counsel.

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 defendants 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 March 18, 2016 to May 27, 2016, 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 each 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 defendants in a speedy trial.

g. This case involves multiple witnesses, multiple defendants; both defendants and the witnesses require interpreters.

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.

DATED: March 17, 2016 /s/ Kresta Daly for Jared Dolan Assistant United States Attorney

ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND 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