Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Johnson, CR 09-612-JST. (2019)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20190215925 Visitors: 25
Filed: Feb. 14, 2019
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SET CHANGE OF PLEA HEARING AND EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . Mr. Johnson currently has two cases before this Court: a new criminal indictment in case 18-602, filed on December 13, 2018, and a pending Form 12 petition alleging violations of Mr. Johnson's supervised release in case 09-612. Both cases are set for a status hearing on February 15, 2019. The parties have been working on a resolution to both cases
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO SET CHANGE OF PLEA HEARING AND EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

Mr. Johnson currently has two cases before this Court: a new criminal indictment in case 18-602, filed on December 13, 2018, and a pending Form 12 petition alleging violations of Mr. Johnson's supervised release in case 09-612. Both cases are set for a status hearing on February 15, 2019. The parties have been working on a resolution to both cases but need additional time to finalize the terms of a plea agreement. Thus, the parties request this Court vacate the status hearing set on February 15, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. and set a change of plea hearing on the new indictment and an admission hearing on the supervised release Form 12 on March 8, 2019 at 9:30 a.m.

The parties also request this Court exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act, between February 15, 2019 and March 8, 2019, to allow for the effective preparation of counsel and continuity of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, as defense counsel continues to investigate the case, review the evidence and consult with his client and negotiate the terms of a plea agreement with the government. If the parties reach a plea agreement, time can also be excluded under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(G) as the Court considers the proposed plea agreement.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based on the reasons provided in the stipulation of the parties above, the Court hereby finds:

1. The defendant and defense counsel need additional time to discuss the case and the evidence and the parties need additional time to finalize a potential resolution of the case;

2. These tasks are necessary for the defense preparation of the case and the failure to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny counsel for defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and

3. The ends of justice served by this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Based on these findings, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED

1. The status hearing set for February 15, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. before this Court is vacated;

2. A change of plea hearing in 18-602-JST and an admission hearing in 09-612-JST be set for March 8, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. before this Court in the Oakland courthouse; and

3. Time is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), from February 15, 2019 through March 8, 2019.

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