Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. HAWKINS, 2:10-CR-458-JAM. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20150408978 Visitors: 7
Filed: Apr. 07, 2015
Latest Update: Apr. 07, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Defendant, KEVIN HAWKINS, in pro per, and the United States, by and through its counsel, Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd Pickles, hereby stipulate and request that the Court vacate the current status conference on April 7, 2015, at 9:15 am. The parties are not requesting that the status conference be reset at this time; rather, they will next appear at the hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss for outrageous
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO VACATE STATUS CONFERENCE

Defendant, KEVIN HAWKINS, in pro per, and the United States, by and through its counsel, Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd Pickles, hereby stipulate and request that the Court vacate the current status conference on April 7, 2015, at 9:15 am. The parties are not requesting that the status conference be reset at this time; rather, they will next appear at the hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss for outrageous government conduct, currently scheduled for April 28, 2015, at 9:15 am.

The parties further stipulate that time should be excluded from the computation of time within which trial must commence under the Speedy Trial Act from April 7, 2015, up to and including April 28, 2015, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow Mr. Hawkins reasonable time to prepare, and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D) and Local Code E upon the filing of motions.

ORDER

The status conference currently set for Tuesday, April 7, 2015 at 9:15 am is vacated. The parties will next appear at the motion hearing currently scheduled for April 28, 2015 at 9:15 am.

Court finds that the time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act is excluded from April 7, 2015, up to and including the date of the motion hearing, April 28, 2015, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T4 and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D) and Local Code E upon the filing of motions. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and defendants in a speedy trial within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) (7) (A) and (B) (IV) and Local Code T-4.

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