Filed: May 07, 2019
Latest Update: May 07, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME FROM CALCULATIONS UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT (18 U.S.C. 3161) BETWEEN MAY 6, 2019, AND JUNE 3, 2019 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . The defendant, Sandford Bemi Faison, represented by David Rizk, Assistant Federal Public Defender, and the government, represented by Philip J. Kearney, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared before the Court on May 6, 2019, for a status conference. The matter was continued to June 3, 2019, for further sta
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME FROM CALCULATIONS UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT (18 U.S.C. 3161) BETWEEN MAY 6, 2019, AND JUNE 3, 2019 HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. , District Judge . The defendant, Sandford Bemi Faison, represented by David Rizk, Assistant Federal Public Defender, and the government, represented by Philip J. Kearney, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared before the Court on May 6, 2019, for a status conference. The matter was continued to June 3, 2019, for further stat..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME FROM CALCULATIONS UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT (18 U.S.C. § 3161) BETWEEN MAY 6, 2019, AND JUNE 3, 2019
HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR., District Judge.
The defendant, Sandford Bemi Faison, represented by David Rizk, Assistant Federal Public Defender, and the government, represented by Philip J. Kearney, Assistant United States Attorney, appeared before the Court on May 6, 2019, for a status conference.
The matter was continued to June 3, 2019, for further status conference or disposition at 2:00 p.m. On May 6, 2019, the government informed the Court and counsel that a remaining tranche of discovery needed to be disclosed to the defendant. Counsel for the defendant agreed to provide a two terabyte hard drive for that purpose.
The parties agreed that time should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act to allow the parties time to review this new discovery, and to allow for the effective preparation of counsel taking into account the exercise of due diligence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties also agreed that the ends of justice were served by the proposed continuance, and that taking such action outweighed the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161 (h)(7)(A). SO STIPULATED:
DAVID L. ANDERSON
United States Attorney
DATED: May 6, 2019 /s/_______________________
PHILIP J. KEARNEY
Assistant United States Attorney
DATED: May 6, 2019 /s/_______________________
DAVID RIZK
Attorney for Sandford Faison
ORDER
Based upon the stipulation of counsel and for good cause shown, the Court finds that failing to continue the matter and exclude the time between May 6, 2019 and June 3, 2019, would deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The Court further finds that the ends of justice served by excluding the time between May 6, 2019 and June 3, 2019, from computation under the Speedy Trial Act outweighs the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that time between May 6, 2019 and June 3, 2019, shall be excluded from computation under the Speedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
