Filed: Mar. 03, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender, Jerome Price, hereby stipulate as follows: By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 7, 2017. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status c
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender, Jerome Price, hereby stipulate as follows: By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 7, 2017. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status co..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
Plaintiff United States of America by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender, Jerome Price, hereby stipulate as follows:
By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 7, 2017. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status conference to May 23, 2017 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between March 7, 2017, and May 23, 2017, under Local Code T4.
Defense counsel requires additional time to review discovery with the defendant and pursue investigation, including to view and analyze the physical discovery (consisting of a desktop computer, 16 GB memory card; cellphone, digital camera, and a DVD) that is made available only at an offsite government facility in accordance with the Adam Walsh Act.
Counsel for the 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. The government does not object to the continuance.
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.
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 7, 2017 to May 23, 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 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.
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.
