Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Tam, 2:14 CR 239 GEB. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20150604949 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jun. 03, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 03, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERNCE GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . Defendants, by and through their undersigned counsel, and the government, by and through Assistant United States Attorney, Michael McCoy, hereby agree and stipulate that this matter, set on calendar June 5, 2015 be continued to July 31, 2015 to allow counsel to review discovery and continue to undergo defense investigation. Therefore the parties request a status conference of July 31, 2015 an
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERNCE

Defendants, by and through their undersigned counsel, and the government, by and through Assistant United States Attorney, Michael McCoy, hereby agree and stipulate that this matter, set on calendar June 5, 2015 be continued to July 31, 2015 to allow counsel to review discovery and continue to undergo defense investigation. Therefore the parties request a status conference of July 31, 2015 and that date is available with the court.

The parties further stipulate that the Court should exclude the period from the date of this order through July 31, 2015, when it computes the time within which the trial of the above criminal prosecution must commence for purposes of the Speedy Trial Act. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice are served by granting the defendants' request for a continuance appropriate exclusion of time for defense preparation within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7) (Local Code T4).

Dated May 28, 2015 /s/ Michael McCoy Michael McCoy Assistant United States Attorney

ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, in that it is the stipulation of the parties:

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference scheduled for Friday, June 5, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. be continued to Friday, July 31, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. and that the period from June 5, 2015 to July 31, 2015 is excludable from calculation under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A) and local rule T4. Further, that the need for a continuance and continued counsel preparation outweighs the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

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