Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Lewis, 2:17-cr-00180-5-JAD-PAL. (2018)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20180726831 Visitors: 4
Filed: Jul. 13, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 13, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING JENNIFER A. DORSEY , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between defendant, MAURICE LEWIS, by and through his counsel, CHRIS T. RASMUSSEN, ESQ., and the United States America, by its counsel, ANTHONY LOPEZ, ESQ., that the above-captioned matter currently scheduled for July 16, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. be vacated and continued for at least one week or a time convenient to the court. This Stipulation is entered into for the following reason
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between defendant, MAURICE LEWIS, by and through his counsel, CHRIS T. RASMUSSEN, ESQ., and the United States America, by its counsel, ANTHONY LOPEZ, ESQ., that the above-captioned matter currently scheduled for July 16, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. be vacated and continued for at least one week or a time convenient to the court.

This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons:

1. The parties agree to a continuance;

2. Counsel for the Defendant has three state cases on for sentencing occurring at this current date and time;

3. Counsel for the Defendant has spoken to the Defendant and the Defendant has no objection to this continuance;

4. Denial of this request could result in a miscarriage of justice;

5. For all the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the sentencing date;

6. This is the first request for continuance.

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

FINDINGS OF FACT

Based on the stipulation of counsel, and good cause appearing, the Court finds that:

1. The parties agree to a continuance;

2. Counsel for the Defendant has three state cases on for sentencing occurring at this current date and time.

3. Counsel for the Defendant has spoken to the Defendant and the Defendant has no objection to this continuance;

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

1. Denial of this request would result in a miscarriage of justice.

2. For all the above-stated reason, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the sentencing date at least one week.

ORDER

Accordingly, IT IS SO ORDERED that the sentencing currently scheduled for July 16, 208 at the hour of 9:00 a.m., by vacated and continued to July 23, 2018, at the hour of 3:00 p.m.

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