Filed: Sep. 15, 2016
Latest Update: Sep. 15, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION; FINDINGS AND ORDER STIPULATION SHEILA K. OBERTO , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on September 19, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 7, 2016. Time has previously been excluded to and through March 7, 2017, the da
Summary: STIPULATION; FINDINGS AND ORDER STIPULATION SHEILA K. OBERTO , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on September 19, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 7, 2016. Time has previously been excluded to and through March 7, 2017, the dat..
More
STIPULATION; FINDINGS AND ORDER
STIPULATION
SHEILA K. OBERTO, District Judge.
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on September 19, 2016.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 7, 2016. Time has previously been excluded to and through March 7, 2017, the date set for jury trial.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government is scheduled to be out of state at a training seminar on the date currently set for status conference.
b) Counsel for the government and the defendant desire additional time to review the discovery, conduct further investigation, consider a global resolution and negotiate the matter.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) 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.
e) For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, time has previously been excluded to and through March 7, 2017, 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.
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 ORDERED.
