Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. ZAMORA, 1:08-CR-00213-AWI. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130114691 Visitors: 8
Filed: Jan. 11, 2013
Latest Update: Jan. 11, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE SENTENCING ANTHONY W. ISHII, District Judge. Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for sentencing on January 14, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the sentencing until April 8, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. and to exclude time between January 14, 2013, and April 8, 2013
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

ANTHONY W. ISHII, District Judge.

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for sentencing on January 14, 2013, at 10:00 a.m.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the sentencing until April 8, 2013, at 10:00 a.m. and to exclude time between January 14, 2013, and April 8, 2013, under 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv). Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

a. The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying. b. The government does not object to the continuance. c. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. d. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of January 14, 2013, to April 8, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) 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.

4. 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.

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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