Filed: Jan. 29, 2014
Latest Update: Jan. 29, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. Plaintiff, the United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 30, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez now requests to continue the status conference until March 6, 2014, and to exclude time b
Summary: STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. Plaintiff, the United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 30, 2014. 2. By this stipulation, the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez now requests to continue the status conference until March 6, 2014, and to exclude time be..
More
STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Plaintiff, the United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 30, 2014.
2. By this stipulation, the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez now requests to continue the status conference until March 6, 2014, and to exclude time between January 30, 2014 and March 6, 2014, under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose Defendant's request.
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 several discs containing audio recordings, and related documents in electronic form. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b. Counsel for Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez desires additional time to consult with his client, to review the current charges, to conduct further investigation and research related to the charges, to review and copy discovery for this matter, to discuss potential resolutions with his client, to prepare pretrial motions, and to otherwise prepare for trial.
c. Counsel for the Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez believes failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d. The government does not object to the request for 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 January 30, 2014 and March 6, 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 Defendant Jorge Medina Vasquez' 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 Jorge Medina Vasquez 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.
ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
