Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Gherasim, 2:12-cr-00388-MCE. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160524743 Visitors: 10
Filed: May 23, 2016
Latest Update: May 23, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . With the Court's permission, defendant Daniel Gherasim and plaintiff United States of America, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 19, 2016; 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 21, 2016 and to exclude time between May 19, 2
More

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER

With the Court's permission, defendant Daniel Gherasim and plaintiff United States of America, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 19, 2016; 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 21, 2016 and to exclude time between May 19, 2016 and July 21, 2016 under local code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request. 3. The parties agree and stipulate that the Court find that counsel for the defendant requires additional time to review the current charges, to review the extensive discovery, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges and to prepare to discuss the matter with his client. 4. The government does not object to the continuance. 5. 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 under the Speedy Trial Act. 6. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. section 3161, et seq., within which the trial date must commence, the time period of May 19, 2016 to July 21, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) and Local Code T4 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. 7. 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:

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