Filed: May 19, 2016
Latest Update: May 19, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE, AND EXCLUDING TIME GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. , District Judge . PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION AND STIPULATION The parties to this litigation, the United States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Mr. Christiaan Highsmith, and the defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants): 1) Mr. Jose Acosta represented by his attorney Mr. Gilbert A. Roque; 2) Mr. Jose Luis Aguilar represented by his attorney Mr. Christoph
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE, AND EXCLUDING TIME GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. , District Judge . PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION AND STIPULATION The parties to this litigation, the United States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Mr. Christiaan Highsmith, and the defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants): 1) Mr. Jose Acosta represented by his attorney Mr. Gilbert A. Roque; 2) Mr. Jose Luis Aguilar represented by his attorney Mr. Christophe..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING DATE, CONTINUING CASE, AND EXCLUDING TIME
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR., District Judge.
PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION AND STIPULATION
The parties to this litigation, the United States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Mr. Christiaan Highsmith, and the defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants): 1) Mr. Jose Acosta represented by his attorney Mr. Gilbert A. Roque; 2) Mr. Jose Luis Aguilar represented by his attorney Mr. Christopher R. Cosca; 3) Mr. Diego Velazquez represented by his attorney Mr. Clemente Jimenez; and 4) Mr. Feliciano Ochoa Reyes represented by his attorney Mr James R. Greiner; hereby agree and stipulate that the Court can vacate the presently set status conference currently scheduled for Friday, May 20, 2016 and re-set the status hearing date to Friday, June 3, 2016.
The reasons supporting the finding for excluding time under the Speedy Trial Act are that the interests of justice outweigh both the public and all of the defendants' rights to a speedy trial even in the exercise of reasonable diligence by counsel and that additional attorney preparation time and review of discovery under Local Code T-4 (adequate time for attorney preparation) are:
1. There are two related cases, 15-73 — GEB and 15-92 —GEB, which have the same interlocking federal investigation;
2. The total number of defendants regarding both case 15-73—GEB and 15-92—GEB is seven (7);
3. Both cases involved, as far as the defense knows to date, have four (4) wire taps: TT1 regarding telephone number (347) 310-1104 (Order signed September 4, 2014); TT2 regarding telephone number (916) 826-2125 (Order signed October 22, 2014); TT3 regarding telephone number (209) 222-7662 (Order signed November 25, 2014); TT4 regarding telephone number (209) 262-9129 (Order signed March 18, 2015).
4. The estimated number of calls associated with all four (4) wire taps, from the documentation produced by the government, is over 4,0001.
5. It appears the over 4,000 wire tap calls are all in Spanish.2 Translation has only recently been completed. Defense counsel are now in the process of reviewing the translated transcripts.
6. To date, the government has produced the initial four (4) affidavits for each of the wire taps, which is approximately 316 pages.
7. Defense counsel had previously received from the Spanish translator both Affidavits translated into Spanish and TT1 and TT3 of the wire tapes translated from Spanish to English.
8. On April 13, 2016, defense counsel received the 296-page transcript of the final wire recordings (TT4).
9. On May 10, 2016, the government sent defense counsel supplemental discovery consisting of logs for: TT1 (pp 390-347); TT2 (pp 983-1156); TT3 (pp 2431-2499); TT4 (pp 3050-3090); call and text message transcripts for target telephone lines TT1,TT2, TT3, AND TT4 (pp 488-982, 1157-2430, 2500-3049, and 3091-3435).
10. The defense attorneys need time to review this additional discovery and to do reasonable investigation thus requiring additional time.
STIPULATION OF EXCLUSION OF TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT BY ALL PARTIES
For the purpose of computing the time under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period from Friday, April 22, 2016 to Friday, June 3, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)(reasonable time for attorney preparation) corresponding to Local Code T-4, because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants' 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 all of the defendants in a speedy trial. All parties agree and stipulate to this exclusion of time from the Speedy Trial Act.
Counsel for the defendants represent that the failure to grant the above requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence by counsel.
The government, based on all of the above, does not object to the continuance. 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.
Finally, all attorneys have given authority for counsel to sign on their behalf this Stipulation and Proposed Order.
[Proposed]ORDER
The Court, having received, read, and considered the agreement and stipulation of the parties hereby adopts the parties' agreements and stipulations in their entirety as the Court's order, and orders that the status conference set for Friday, May 20, 2016 is vacated, and a further status conference is set for Friday, June 3, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.
This Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting such continuance outweigh the best interests of both the public and all of the defendants in a speedy trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
