Filed: Jun. 22, 2017
Latest Update: Jun. 22, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM JUNE 20, 2017, TO JULY 11, 2017 WILLIAM H. ALSUP , District Judge . On June 20, 2017, undersigned counsel and the defendant appeared before the Court for a scheduled status conference. At the parties' request, the Court scheduled a potential change of plea for July 11, 2017 at 2:00 PM. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between June 20, 2017, and July 11, 2017, should be excluded in order
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM JUNE 20, 2017, TO JULY 11, 2017 WILLIAM H. ALSUP , District Judge . On June 20, 2017, undersigned counsel and the defendant appeared before the Court for a scheduled status conference. At the parties' request, the Court scheduled a potential change of plea for July 11, 2017 at 2:00 PM. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between June 20, 2017, and July 11, 2017, should be excluded in order ..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM JUNE 20, 2017, TO JULY 11, 2017
WILLIAM H. ALSUP, District Judge.
On June 20, 2017, undersigned counsel and the defendant appeared before the Court for a scheduled status conference. At the parties' request, the Court scheduled a potential change of plea for July 11, 2017 at 2:00 PM. The parties agree and jointly request that the time between June 20, 2017, and July 11, 2017, should be excluded in order to provide reasonable time necessary for the effective preparation of counsel, 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 interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
SOSTIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that the exclusion of time from June 20, 2017, through and including July 11, 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.
