Filed: May 27, 2016
Latest Update: May 27, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 27, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 24, 2016, and to exclude time between May 27, 2016, and June 24, 2016, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a)
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 27, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 24, 2016, and to exclude time between May 27, 2016, and June 24, 2016, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) ..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 27, 2016.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 24, 2016, and to exclude time between May 27, 2016, and June 24, 2016, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case includes more than 500 pages of discovery, including investigative reports and photographs. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) The government has provided a plea agreement to counsel. Counsel will need additional time to review the agreement as well as the discovery in the case with respect to the terms and factual basis of the agreement, and consult with his client regarding implications for trial. This review involves an investigation of the potential immigration consequences of any resolution in light of the defendant's withholding of removal immigration status, and a discussion of the client's immigration status with the client's immigration counsel based on the defendant's Brazilian citizenship.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that 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.
d) The government does not object to the continuance.
e) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
f) 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 May 27, 2016 to June 24, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] 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 the defendant in a speedy trial.
4. 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.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
