Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. BARRON-RUEDA, 1:12-CR-00040 LJO-SKO. (2012)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20121226568 Visitors: 4
Filed: Dec. 20, 2012
Latest Update: Dec. 20, 2012
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND ORDER LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, that the status conference currently scheduled for Monday, January 7, 2013, be continued to Monday, February 11, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. This continuance is requested based upon the fact that counsel for the Defendant herein needs additional time for investigation and preparation relative to this case. Specifically, current counsel substituted into
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND ORDER

LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, that the status conference currently scheduled for Monday, January 7, 2013, be continued to Monday, February 11, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. This continuance is requested based upon the fact that counsel for the Defendant herein needs additional time for investigation and preparation relative to this case. Specifically, current counsel substituted into the case only recently and has commenced work as related to the plea offer which has been extended to the Defendant. The bottom line is that discovery is voluminous and counsel needs to be able to thoroughly review said discovery in order to assess the Defendant's position such that a professional and appropriate response can be made to the government's plea offer. Counsel has embarked upon said review of the discovery and was only first able to meet with Defendant BARRON-RUEDA on Sunday, December 16, 2012, at the Lerdo facility in order to commence attorney-client discussions with the aid of an interpreter.

These circumstances have been related to Assistant United States Attorney Kathleen Servatius, who expresses no objection to the requested continuance.

The parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and that the delay from the continuance shall be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

It is your Declarant's opinion that a continuance such as requested shall not prejudice any party concerned with this matter.

ORDER

The motion is granted. Time is excluded based on the good cause stated. To put this matter out so far into the future, at the February status conference, either a change of plea will be taken or a trial date will be set.

IT IS SO 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