Filed: Mar. 01, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM FEBRUARY 28, 2017, TO MARCH 21, 2017 RICHARD SEEBORG , Senior District Judge . On February 28, 2017, the defendant Donald Jason Lien and his counsel appeared before this Court. At the hearing, and at the parties' request, the Court entered a briefing schedule setting a March 21, 2017, date for the defendant to file a motion to suppress. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between February 2
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM FEBRUARY 28, 2017, TO MARCH 21, 2017 RICHARD SEEBORG , Senior District Judge . On February 28, 2017, the defendant Donald Jason Lien and his counsel appeared before this Court. At the hearing, and at the parties' request, the Court entered a briefing schedule setting a March 21, 2017, date for the defendant to file a motion to suppress. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between February 28..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM FEBRUARY 28, 2017, TO MARCH 21, 2017
RICHARD SEEBORG, Senior District Judge.
On February 28, 2017, the defendant Donald Jason Lien and his counsel appeared before this Court. At the hearing, and at the parties' request, the Court entered a briefing schedule setting a March 21, 2017, date for the defendant to file a motion to suppress. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between February 28, 2017, and March 21, 2017, should be excluded in order to provide reasonable time necessary for the effective preparation of counsel, namely, for defense counsel to prepare and file a motion to suppress, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties agree that the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
SO STIPULATED:
[PROPOSED] ORDER
For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that the exclusion of time from February 28, 2017, through and including March 21, 2017, is warranted and that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny effective preparation of counsel, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
