Filed: Sep. 17, 2014
Latest Update: Sep. 17, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge. 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 September 19, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 14, 2014, and to exclude time between September 19, 2014, and November 14, 2014, under Lo
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge. 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 September 19, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 14, 2014, and to exclude time between September 19, 2014, and November 14, 2014, under Loc..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge.
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 September 19, 2014.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 14, 2014, and to exclude time between September 19, 2014, and November 14, 2014, under Local Code T4, in case 2:14-cr-0090 GEB.
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 is primarily physical evidence, seized from the defendant's residence, which is available for review by his counsel, and that there is one report forthcoming.
b) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to conduct legal research regarding the pending charges, and to arrange to physically inspect the evidence in this case.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him 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 September 19, 2014 to November 14, 2014 inclusive, is deemed excludable in case 2:14-cr-0090 GEB 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.
Dated: September 17, 2014 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney
/s/Matthew Morris
Matthew Morris
Assistant United States Attorney
[PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
