Filed: Mar. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 07, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION The United States of America, through its undersigned counsel, Ross K. Naughton, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Secundino Esquibel, Michael E. Hingle, Esq.; counsel for defendant Oscar Gonzalez, Jesse Ortiz, III, Esq.; counsel for defendant Manuel Marzial, Olaf W. Hedberg, Esq.; counsel for defendant Antonio Gomez, Cle
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION The United States of America, through its undersigned counsel, Ross K. Naughton, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Secundino Esquibel, Michael E. Hingle, Esq.; counsel for defendant Oscar Gonzalez, Jesse Ortiz, III, Esq.; counsel for defendant Manuel Marzial, Olaf W. Hedberg, Esq.; counsel for defendant Antonio Gomez, Clem..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
The United States of America, through its undersigned counsel, Ross K. Naughton, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Secundino Esquibel, Michael E. Hingle, Esq.; counsel for defendant Oscar Gonzalez, Jesse Ortiz, III, Esq.; counsel for defendant Manuel Marzial, Olaf W. Hedberg, Esq.; counsel for defendant Antonio Gomez, Clemente Jimenez, Esq.; and counsel for defendant Moises Torres, Todd D. Leras, Esq., hereby stipulate the following:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on March 9, 2017.
2. By this stipulation, the above-named defendants now move to continue the status conference until April 27, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between March 9, 2017, and April 27, 2017, under Local Code T4.
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 includes over 900 pages of discovery and 3 video recordings. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for the above-named defendants desire additional time to review the discovery, conduct investigation, and interview potential witnesses.
c) Counsel for the above-named defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel 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 March 9, 2017 to April 27, 2017, 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 defendants' 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.
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
