Filed: May 15, 2014
Latest Update: May 15, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 22, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 14, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between May 22, 2014 and August 14, 2014 under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a. The gove
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 22, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 14, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between May 22, 2014 and August 14, 2014 under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a. The gover..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 22, 2014.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 14, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between May 22, 2014 and August 14, 2014 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 over six thousand pages of discovery. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying. Counsel for defendants desire additional time because counsel for Surgit Singh is currently in trial in state court in a murder case and is unavailable until late June, 2014. Counsel for Raj Singh is out of the country and unavailable from late June to mid-July, 2014, and scheduled to start a trial in late July in state court. All counsel need additional time in which to review discovery, consult with their clients regarding possible defenses, and conduct investigation.
b. Counsel for defendants believe 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.
c. The government does not object to the continuance.
d. 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 defendants in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
e. 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 22, 2014 to August 14, 2014 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 defendants 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.
Dated: May 13, 2014 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
/s/ Lee Bickley
Lee Bickley
Assistant United States Attorney
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
