Filed: Dec. 17, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 17, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, Michelle Rodriguez, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and Matthew M. Scoble, attorney for Alfredo Jurado Martinez, that: 1. The Complaint in this case was filed on October 22, 2015, and the defendant first appeared before a judicial officer of the Court in which the charges
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING ALLISON CLAIRE , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, Michelle Rodriguez, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and Matthew M. Scoble, attorney for Alfredo Jurado Martinez, that: 1. The Complaint in this case was filed on October 22, 2015, and the defendant first appeared before a judicial officer of the Court in which the charges i..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE PRELIMINARY HEARING
ALLISON CLAIRE, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, Michelle Rodriguez, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and Matthew M. Scoble, attorney for Alfredo Jurado Martinez, that:
1. The Complaint in this case was filed on October 22, 2015, and the defendant first appeared before a judicial officer of the Court in which the charges in this case were pending on October 26, 2015. The court has most recently set a preliminary hearing date of December 17, 2015.
2. By this stipulation, the parties jointly move for an extension of time of the preliminary hearing date to January 14, 2016, at 2:00 p.m., before the duty Magistrate Judge, pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The parties stipulate that the delay is required to sort out a factual basis for the case as well as continue negotiations toward a non-trial disposition.
3. The parties further agree that good cause exists for the extension of time, and that the extension of time would not adversely affect the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. Therefore, the parties request that the time between December 17, 2015, and January 14, 2016, be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), Local Code T-4.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
DATED: December 16, 2015 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
/s/ Michelle Rodriguez
MICHELLE RODRIGUEZ
Assistant U.S. Attorney
ORDER
The Court has read and considered the Stipulation for Extension of Time for Preliminary Hearing Pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) and Exclusion of Time, filed by the parties in this matter on December 16, 2015. The Court hereby finds that the Stipulation, which this Court incorporates by reference into this Order, demonstrates good cause for an extension of time for the preliminary hearing date pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Furthermore, for the reasons set forth in the parties' stipulation, the Court finds that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), Local Code T-4. The Court further finds that the extension of time would not adversely affect the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases.
THEREFORE, FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN:
1. The preliminary hearing is continued to January 14, 2016, at 2:00 p.m.
2. The time between December 17, 2015, and January 14, 2016, shall be excluded from calculation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), Local Code T-4.
3. Defendant shall appear at that date and time before the Magistrate Judge on duty.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
