STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING HEARING; ORDER THEREON

DALE A. DROZD, District Judge.

WHEREAS the Sentencing Hearing has been scheduled in this matter for February 11, 2019.

WHEREAS Roger S. Bonakdar, counsel for Defendant Daniel Feliciano Sandoval-Arce (herein "Mr. Sandoval-Arce"), and Probation Officer Ms. Flores, jointly request additional time to meet with Mr. Sandoval-Arce to prepare the Presentence Investigation Report.

WHEREAS the interview with Defendant was set but had to be cancelled due to the Probation Officer's unforeseeable family emergency.

WHEREAS there is insufficient time for the parties to meet for the probation interview, so that the PSR may be prepared in time for the sentencing hearing, as presently set.

WHEREAS counsel for the parties have met and conferred concerning the continuance, and the Government has no opposition to a continuance.

THEREFORE, IT IS STIPULATED by and between the parties that the February 11, 2019, sentencing hearing be continued to February 25, 2019.

THEREFORE, IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that this Stipulation may be executed in multiple counterparts, and that said counterparts (when offered together) shall constitute a fully executed original. In this regard, signatures by electronic means shall be given the same force and effect as originals.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

The Stipulation to Continue Sentencing Hearing having come before this Court and good cause appearing therefore;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the February 11, 2019, sentencing hearing is hereby continued to February 25, 2019.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadlines for exchange of informal objections, and filing of formal objections and sentencing memorandum, shall be extended to reconcile with the continued Sentencing Hearing date.

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 February 11, 2019, to February 25, 2019, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C., §3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) 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.

IT IS SO ORDERED.