Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Esquivel-Cornejo, 2:16-CR-206-MCE. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170918732 Visitors: 12
Filed: Sep. 14, 2017
Latest Update: Sep. 14, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between plaintiff United States of America, on the one hand, and defendants Marco Antonio Esquivel-Cornejo, Jesus Esquivel-Cornejo, and Oliver Lopez Alvarado, on the other hand, through their respective attorneys, that the presently set September 14, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., status conference hearing shall be conti
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between plaintiff United States of America, on the one hand, and defendants Marco Antonio Esquivel-Cornejo, Jesus Esquivel-Cornejo, and Oliver Lopez Alvarado, on the other hand, through their respective attorneys, that the presently set September 14, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., status conference hearing shall be continued by the Court to October 19, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., to allow respective counsel for the each defendant to review discovery produced by the United States, conduct their independent investigation into the facts and applicable law, interview witnesses, discuss with their client potential pretrial resolution, and otherwise prepare their client's defense.

The parties agree and request that the Court find that: (1) the failure to grant this requested continuance would deny respective counsel for each defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and (2) the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a trial in a speedy trial.

The parties further agree and request that the Court order for the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which the trial of this case must commence, the time period from the date of this stipulation, September 12, 2017, to and including the October 19, 2017, status conference hearing, shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv) and Local Code T4 to allow respective counsel for each defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of their client's defenses.

ORDER

The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its Order. It is hereby ORDERED that the presently set September 14, 2017, at 10:00 a.m., status conference hearing shall be continued to October 19, 2017, at 10:00 a.m.

Based on the representations of the parties in their stipulation, the Court finds that: (1) the failure to grant this requested continuance would deny respective counsel for each defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and (2) the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a trial in a speedy trial.

The Court hereby orders that for the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which the trial of this case must commence, the time period from the date of this stipulation, September 12, 2017, to and including the October 19, 2017, status conference hearing, shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv) and Local Code T4 to allow respective counsel for each defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of their client's defenses.

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