Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Rangel, 2:15-CR-093 GEB. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160317a04 Visitors: 40
Filed: Mar. 16, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 16, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . This matter is presently set for a status conference before the Court on March 18, 2016. The parties to this action, Plaintiff United States of America by and through Assistant United States Attorney Christiaan Highsmith, and Defendant Alex Velasquez Rangel (a.k.a. Juan Serrano Garcia) by and through his attorney Todd D. Leras, stipula
More

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

This matter is presently set for a status conference before the Court on March 18, 2016. The parties to this action, Plaintiff United States of America by and through Assistant United States Attorney Christiaan Highsmith, and Defendant Alex Velasquez Rangel (a.k.a. Juan Serrano Garcia) by and through his attorney Todd D. Leras, stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference on March 18, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, Defendant now moves to continue the status conference to April 22, 2016, at 9:00 a.m., and to exclude time between March 18, 2016 and April 22, 2016, under Local Code T-4. The United States does not oppose this request. 3. Defendant's appointed counsel is conducting investigation and legal research in this matter related to potential defenses available in the event the case does not resolve through a negotiated plea agreement. The additional time requested is necessary to complete the required investigation and research. The defendant requires the assistance of a Spanish language interpreter, so the additional time is needed to ensure that he is apprised in his own language of the results of the investigation and research. 4. Defense counsel believes that failure to grant additional time as requested would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account counsel's exercise of due diligence. 5. Based on the above-stated facts, the parties jointly request that the Court find that the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a trial within the time prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. 6. 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 March 18, 2016 to April 22, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), and (B) (iv) [Local Code T-4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at Defendant's request on the basis that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Christiaan Highsmith has reviewed this proposed order and authorized Todd Leras to sign it on his behalf.

ORDER

BASED ON THE REPRESENTATIONS AND STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES, it is hereby ordered that the status conference in this matter, scheduled for March 18, 2016, is vacated. A new status conference is scheduled for April 22, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. The Court further finds, based on the representations of the parties and Defendant's request, that the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Time shall be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow necessary attorney preparation taking into consideration the exercise of due diligence for the period from March 18, 2016, up to and including April 22, 2016.

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