Filed: Mar. 01, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 01, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on March 22, 2018; 2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from March 22, 2018 to July 19, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on March 22, 2018; 2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from March 22, 2018 to July 19, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between ..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on March 22, 2018;
2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from March 22, 2018 to July 19, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between March 22, 2018 and July 19, 2018 under Local Codes T4 and T2. As this Court is aware, this is a financial loss case and to date, 21,000 pages of discovery have been provided by the government.
3. Defense counsel attempted to be prepared to either set this matter for trial or reach a disposition with the government by this date but her caseload has made that difficult for the following reasons:
a. Counsel is set for trial in an escape case in United States vs. Hall, CR. 17-519-RS [NDCA] on March 2, 2018. The client is in custody and has mental issues that necessitated a competency hearing;
b. Counsel is set for trial on May 4th in United States vs. Lin, et al., CR. 15-00065-BLF [NDCA] in a three to four-week complex tax evasion trial;
c. Both of these trials require a great deal of pretrial preparation;
d. Additionally, counsel has been preparing supplemental declarations for an evidentiary hearing regarding compliance with California medical marijuana laws in United States vs. Goldberg, CR. 14-00016-MMC [NDCA],
e. Counsel also has several state and federal cases that require review of discovery, meetings with clients and court appearances.
4. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a. To date over 21,000 pages of discovery have been provided which include a large amount of financial records.
b. Counsel for the defendant desires additional time to review the discovery, consult with the defendant and conduct investigation.
c. Counsel will be prepared at the next calling of this case to either set it for trial or enter into a disposition.
5. Counsel believes that failing to exclude the time between March 22, 2018 and July 19, 2018, would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, considering the exercise of due diligence, and would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
6. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time of March 22, 2018 through July 19, 2018, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 3161 (h)(7)(A)(B)(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of Justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
7. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial must commence.
IT IS SO STIPULATED AND ORDERED:
SO ORDERED.
