Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Ward, CR 16-00485 JST. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20170504b65 Visitors: 32
Filed: May 03, 2017
Latest Update: May 03, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM MAY 2, 2017 TO MAY 26, 2017 JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . On May 2, 2017, the defendant, Michael Ward, represented by John Paul Reichmuth, Assistant Federal Public Defender, and the government, represented by Michelle Bazu, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar for a suppression motion hearing. The matter was continued to May 26, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. to set further proceedings. The parties agree to
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM MAY 2, 2017 TO MAY 26, 2017

On May 2, 2017, the defendant, Michael Ward, represented by John Paul Reichmuth, Assistant Federal Public Defender, and the government, represented by Michelle Bazu, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar for a suppression motion hearing. The matter was continued to May 26, 2017, at 9:30 a.m. to set further proceedings.

The parties agree to exclude the time between May 2, 2017 and May 26, 2017 from the time in which the defendant must be brought to trial pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3131 et al. Defense counsel continues to conduct further investigation and research, and will need additional time to discuss the case with the defendant. Therefore, the parties agree that the time period of May 2, 2017 and May 26, 2017, inclusive, should be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (h)(7)(B)(iv) on the basis that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial, and failing to exclude this time would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

ORDER

Based upon the representations of counsel and for good cause shown, the Court finds that failing to exclude the time between from May 2, 2017 through May 26, 2017 would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The Court further finds that the ends of justice served by excluding the time from May 2, 2017 through May 26, 2017 from computation under the Speedy Trial Act outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time from May 2, 2017 through May 26, 2017 shall be excluded from computation under the Speedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

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