Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. SKINNER, CR 13-MJ-70065 MAG. (2014)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20150122h38 Visitors: 43
Filed: Dec. 12, 2014
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER. HOWARD R. LLOYD, Magistrate Judge. Defendant Walter Skinner and the United States hereby stipulate and mutually agree that the status hearing as to the defendant's evaluation for possible diversion, currently scheduled for Friday, December 12, 2014, at 1:30 p.m., should be continued to Tuesday, January 13, 2015, at 1:30 p.m., to permit the parties to exchange further information relative to the consideration of the defendant's potential diversion, relative t
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER.

HOWARD R. LLOYD, Magistrate Judge.

Defendant Walter Skinner and the United States hereby stipulate and mutually agree that the status hearing as to the defendant's evaluation for possible diversion, currently scheduled for Friday, December 12, 2014, at 1:30 p.m., should be continued to Tuesday, January 13, 2015, at 1:30 p.m., to permit the parties to exchange further information relative to the consideration of the defendant's potential diversion, relative to the prior report from Pretrial Services, specifically the precise calculation of the amount of restitution, the accompanying repayment schedule, and the amount of defendant's initial payment at the time of the execution of the diversion agreement under consideration.

Accordingly, the parties further stipulate that the time from December 12, 2014, through and including January 13, 2015, may be excluded from the computation of time within which an information or indictment shall be filed under the Speedy Trial Act, in order to ensure the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code Section 3161(b), (h)(7)(A), (h)(7)(B)(iv), as well as a mutual stipulation to waive time for an indictment or preliminary hearing, pursuant to Rule 5.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, up to and including January 13, 2015, based on the need for effective preparation of counsel as well as the defendant's evaluation for diversion and the terms thereto.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

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