STIPULATION AND ORDER

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., District Judge.

Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the Defendant, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. In mid-afternoon of Tuesday, October 15, 2019, I was informed by interpreter services that the Farsi interpreter originally and previously scheduled was not available for the upcoming hearing on October 17, 2019, because of their immersion in trial on another case. It is imperative that defendant have an interpreter to be able to knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily make any decision at his next in person appearance. Interpreter services has stated that they have scheduled an interpreter for October 24, 2019. Defense requests this date for future hearing.

2. Further, Attorney Whitworth needs additional time to review and finalize defendant's intent to either change his plea or to set for trial. Further, I have not had a direct conversation with defendant regarding the potential immigration consequences of proposed disposition and or be able to finalize review of discovery with client. Client has had contact and advice from an immigration attorney. Additional time is needed to have a Farsi interpreter available, and to complete the last interaction with client before he makes a decision.

3. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status conference until October 24, 2019 at 9 am, and to exclude time between October 17, 2019 at 9 am and October 24, 2019 at 9 am, under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

4. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

a. The government has provided discovery associated with this case.

b. Counsel for the defendant desires time to consult with their client, to review the current charges, to conduct and finish investigation and research related to the charges, to review and copy discovery for these matters and to discuss potential resolutions with their client.

Counsel for the defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them 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 October 17, 2019, to October 24, 2019, 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.

5. 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 hereby ordered that the October 17, 2019 at 9:00 a.m. status conference be continued to October 24, 2019 at 9 am. The Court finds that the ends of justice warrant an exclusion of time and that the defendant needing this time for continuity of counsel and reasonable time for effective preparation exceeds the public interest in a speedy trial. Accordingly, it is therefore ordered that time be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) and Local Code T4 from the date of this order to October 24, 2019.

The Court has reviewed all correspondence received by its Courtroom Deputy concerning the filing of the foregoing stipulation, however, and is aware that Defense Counsel originally submitted this request to the Court without having obtained the approval of the Government. See Ex. A to this Order. Defense Counsel is admonished that no documents shall be submitted to this Court or filed on the docket indicating that all counsel concur unless that is actually the case. See E.D. Cal. Local R. 131(e). Word versions of stipulations or other filings will not be considered by the Court until after they are filed on the docket. If Defense Counsel attempts at any point going forward, in this or any other case before this Court, to misrepresent that the Government has given permission to attach an attorney's signature when it has not, sanctions will be imposed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.