Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Edwards, CR 17-00337-03 HSG. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180314a70 Visitors: 9
Filed: Mar. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 13, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING MATTER AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . The parties appeared before the Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on March 12, 2018, at which point the Court set August 27, 2018, for trial in the matter and August 13, 2018, for the pretrial conference. The Court set these dates based on the declarations of the parties describing their trial schedules in 2018. The parties stipulated, and the Court ordered, that
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING MATTER AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

The parties appeared before the Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. on March 12, 2018, at which point the Court set August 27, 2018, for trial in the matter and August 13, 2018, for the pretrial conference. The Court set these dates based on the declarations of the parties describing their trial schedules in 2018. The parties stipulated, and the Court ordered, that time between March 12, 2018, and August 27, 2018, be excluded for effective preparation of counsel and continuity of counsel pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

The parties further stipulate, and ask the Court to find, that the requested continuance and exclusion of time are in the interests of justice and outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

SO STIPULATED.

Attestation of Filer

In addition to myself, the other signatory to this document is Charles Woodson. I attest that I have his permission to enter a conformed signature on his behalf and to file the document.

ORDER

For the reasons stated, this matter is continued until August 27, 2018. The time between March

12, 2018, and August 27, 2018 is excluded from the running of the sppeedy trial clock for effective preparation of counsel and continuity of counsel under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Failure to grant the continuance would deny the defendant's counsel the reasonable time necessary to prepare, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

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