Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. McIntyre, 2:16-CR-224-GEB. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170227894 Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 24, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 24, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between plaintiff United States of America, on the one hand, and defendants Jenivive Sahra Jane McIntyre and Zachery Joseph Bastien, on the other hand, through their respective attorneys, that the presently set February 28, 2017, at 9:15 a.m., status conference hearing shall be continued by the Court to May 2, 2017, at 9
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between plaintiff United States of America, on the one hand, and defendants Jenivive Sahra Jane McIntyre and Zachery Joseph Bastien, on the other hand, through their respective attorneys, that the presently set February 28, 2017, at 9:15 a.m., status conference hearing shall be continued by the Court to May 2, 2017, at 9:15 a.m., to: (1) allow counsel for McIntyre to resolve his scheduling conflict with the presently set February 28, 2017, date as he has a jury trial in state court case set for the same day; (2) allow counsel for McIntyre to review discovery, including Bates numbered materials MCINTYRE_001001 through MCINTYRE_001276, produced by the United States, conduct his independent investigation into the facts and applicable law, interview witnesses, discuss with his client potential pretrial resolution, and otherwise prepare McIntyre's defense; (2) allow Bastien time to obtain new counsel to replace existing counsel, Thomas Johnson, Esq.; (3) allow new counsel for Bastien to request discovery, which the United States stands ready to produce; and (4) allow new counsel for Bastien to review discovery, conduct his independent investigation into the facts and applicable law, interview witnesses, discuss with his client potential pretrial resolution, and otherwise prepare Bastien's defense. Bastien's present counsel, Mr. Johnson, has communicated with Bastien and Bastien's anticipated new counsel, Todd Leras, Esq, and Bastien and Mr. Leras have no objection to the instant stipulation and proposed order.

The parties agree and request that the Court find that: (1) the failure to grant this requested continuance would deny both McIntyre and Bastien continuity of counsel, and both defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and (2) the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a trial in a speedy trial.

The parties further agree and request that the Court order for the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which the trial of this case must commence, the time period from the date of this stipulation, February 23, 2017, to and including the May 2, 2017, status conference hearing, shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv) and Local Code T4 to allow continuity of both defense counsel, and both defense counsel reasonable time to prepare their respective client's defenses.

ORDER

The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its Order. It is hereby ORDERED that the presently set February 28, 2017, at 9:15 a.m., status conference hearing shall be continued to May 2, 2017, at 9:15 a.m.

Based on the representations of the parties in their stipulation, the Court finds that the failure to grant this requested continuance would deny both defendants Jenivive McIntyre and Zachery Bastien continuity of their respective counsel, and both defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court hereby orders that for the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which the trial of this case must commence, the time period from the date of this stipulation, February 23, 2017, to and including the May 2, 2017, status conference hearing, shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv) and Local Code T4 to allow both defendants continuity of their respective counsel, and both defense counsel time to prepare their respective client's defenses.

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