Filed: Jan. 17, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 17, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE REPLY TO THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE (ECF No. 254) TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS (ECF No. 203)(First Request) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the United States of America, by and through Cristina D. Silva, Assistant United States Attorney, and Everly James, by and through his attorney, Christopher R. Oram, that the Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress, currently due on Monday,
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE REPLY TO THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE (ECF No. 254) TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS (ECF No. 203)(First Request) PEGGY A. LEEN , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the United States of America, by and through Cristina D. Silva, Assistant United States Attorney, and Everly James, by and through his attorney, Christopher R. Oram, that the Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress, currently due on Monday, ..
More
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE THE REPLY TO THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE (ECF No. 254) TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO SUPPRESS (ECF No. 203)(First Request)
PEGGY A. LEEN, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the United States of America, by and through Cristina D. Silva, Assistant United States Attorney, and Everly James, by and through his attorney, Christopher R. Oram, that the Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress, currently due on Monday, January 15, 2018, be continued for two (2) weeks, until January 29, 2018, for the following reasons:
1. Counsel for the Defendant requires additional time to draft a response to the Reply and to discuss the Government's Response with the Defendant.
2. Plea negotiations are continuing in the instant case.
3. The defendant is in custody and does not object to this stipulation.
4. Denial of this request could result in a miscarriage of justice because it prevents counsel for the Defendant from having meaningful discussions with the Defendant concerning the Reply.
5. This is the first request to continue the Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress.
Based upon the pending Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court finds that:
1. Counsel for the Defendant requires additional time to draft a response to the Reply and to discuss the Government's Response with the Defendant.
2. Plea negotiations are continuing in the instant case.
3. The defendant is in custody and does not object to this stipulation.
4. Denial of this request could result in a miscarriage of justice because it prevents counsel for the Defendant from having meaningful discussions with the Defendant concerning the Reply.
5. This is the first request to continue the Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress.
For all of the above-stated reasons, the end of justice would best be served by a two week continuance of the deadline for the Defendant to file his Reply to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's deadline to respond to the Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Suppress, currently scheduled for January 15, 2018, be vacated and continued to January 29, 2018.
