U.S. v. Holmes, 2:14-CR-317 GEB. (2016)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20160729826
Visitors: 10
Filed: Jul. 27, 2016
Latest Update: Jul. 27, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior 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 July 29, 2016. a) By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until September 2
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior 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 July 29, 2016. a) By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until September 23..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior 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 July 29, 2016.
a) By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until September 23, 2016, and to exclude time between July 29, 2016, and September 23, 2016, under Local Code T4.
2. 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 recorded interviews, reports of investigation, and internet and email records in both paper and electronic format. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Defense counsel needs additional time to consult with his client and prepare for the defense of this case. Defense counsel has recently concluded one federal trial and is set to begin another the week of August 1, 2016. Given his impacted trial schedule and the need to prepare for, and try, those cases, he is currently unavailable to try this case and to otherwise conduct necessary investigation and discovery review. The continuance is necessary to give the defense time to complete the investigation and allow the prosecution to continue to review the material provided by the defense.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him 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 July 29, 2016 to September 23, 2016, 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.
3. 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
