STIPULATION AND ORDER (1) NARROWING POTENTIAL ISSUES IN DISPUTE AT SENTENCING AND (2) TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

ANTHONY W. ISHII, Senior District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties hereto through their respective counsel, BRIAN W. ENOS, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for plaintiff, and ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant Ernest Garza Reyes, that the sentencing hearing currently scheduled for July 20, 2015, may be continued to August 10, 2015, or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the Court.

The parties further stipulate to the following Sentencing Guideline calculations in an effort to narrow the potential issues in dispute at sentencing:

1. The parties agree that defendant Ernest Garza Reyes' conduct is governed by USSG Section 2G2.2, and that the base offense level for his offense is twenty-two (22) under USSG § 2G2.2(a)(2).

2. The parties further agree that the following enhancements apply to the calculation of Mr. Reyes offense level under the Sentencing Guidelines:

i. Two (2) levels because the material included sexually explicit images of prepubescent minors and/or children under twelve years of age (§2G2.2(b)(2));

ii. Two (2) levels because the offense involved the use of a computer (§2G2.2(b)(6));

iii. Five (5) levels because the offense involved more than 600 images (§2G2.2(b)(7)(D));

iv. Four (4) levels because the offense involved material that portrays sadistic or masochistic conduct or other depictions of violence (§2G2.2(b)(4)); and

v. Five (5) levels because the offense involved distribution for the receipt, or expectation of receipt, of a thing of value, but not for pecuniary gain (§ 2G2.2(b)(3)(B)), for an adjusted offense level of forty (40).

3. The parties agree that defendant's total offense level, after a three level reduction for acceptance of responsibility, is thirty-seven (37), and that he is in Criminal History Category I.

4. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) Factors

Mr. Reyes stipulates to the guideline calculations listed above, but he does not agree that a guideline sentence is reasonable in light of the circumstances of the case and the sentencing factors set forth under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The parties will argue for what they believe to be an appropriate sentence, and are requesting additional time for defendant to brief those issues he believes the court should consider at sentencing. In light of the content of this stipulation, the government does not anticipate filing a sentencing memo and instead will rely on the content of the PSR.

The parties are attempting to reach an agreement regarding an appropriate sentence, but have been unable to do so. If the parties do reach an agreement regarding a recommended term of incarceration, they will promptly notify the court.

The parties agree that any delay resulting from this continuance shall be excluded as necessary for effective defense preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). For this reason, the ends of justice served by the granting of the requested continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.