Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. FARRELL, CR. S-12-0076 TLN. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130509857 Visitors: 10
Filed: May 08, 2013
Latest Update: May 08, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. Defendants SEAN FARRELL and ETHAN STUART, by and through their attorneys, and plaintiff United States of America, by and through its attorney, hereby stipulate and agree that the status conference of May 6, 2013, at 9:30 a.m., should be continued to June 20, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. The primary basis for this continuance is predicated upon the recent reassignment of this case to Hon. Troy L. Nunley
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

Defendants SEAN FARRELL and ETHAN STUART, by and through their attorneys, and plaintiff United States of America, by and through its attorney, hereby stipulate and agree that the status conference of May 6, 2013, at 9:30 a.m., should be continued to June 20, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.

The primary basis for this continuance is predicated upon the recent reassignment of this case to Hon. Troy L. Nunley.

In addition, the parties have recently met and conferred and are working to reach a disposition of this case short of protracted litigation.

Should this case not resolve, the parties are still ironing out discovery related issues and working with the government to obtain additional discovery in this matter, which is relevant and necessary prior to the submission of motions including the Motion to Quash and Motion to Traverse the Warrant, both relating to the suppression of evidence, which could be dispositive to this case.

For these reasons, the parties respectfully request that the Court continue the status conference date currently set for May 6, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. and set a new status conference date of June 20, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.

The parties agree to exclude time, based on the pendency of the motions, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)(i) & (iv) and Local Code T4, and the continuity of counsel, such that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial because the failure to grant such a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel.

Accordingly, the parties stipulate and agree that time should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice are served by the Court excluding such time, so that counsel for each defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence and continuity of counsel. The parties further stipulate and agree that time for trial under the Speedy Trial Act be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D) & (h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv), Local Codes E and T-4.

ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The status conference in this matter set for May 6,

2013 is continued, and a new status conference be set for June 20, 2013, at 9:30 a.m.; and

3. Based upon the representations and stipulation of the parties, the Court finds that the time exclusion under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv) applies and the ends of justice outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. The parties further stipulate and agree that time for trial under the Speedy Trial Act be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D) & (h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv), Local Codes E and T-4. Accordingly, time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded from May 6, 2013 up to and including June 20, 2013.

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