Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Smith, 2:17-CR-238-TLN. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180827720 Visitors: 15
Filed: Aug. 24, 2018
Latest Update: Aug. 24, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION 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 August 30, 2018. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 15, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and
More

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER

STIPULATION

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 August 30, 2018.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until November 15, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between August 30, 2018, and November 15, 2018, under Local Code T4.

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 hundreds of pages of investigative reports, forensic reports, and other documentary evidence, along with electronic devices made available for review, which contain child pornography. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection. b) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to conduct a forensic review of the electronic devices seized in this case, and consult further with his client after that review is completed. 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) The government does not object to the 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 August 30, 2018 to November 15, 2018, 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's 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 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.

FINDINGS AND ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND 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