Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. RAMIREZ, 12-CR-0298 LKK. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130131928 Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 29, 2013
Latest Update: Jan. 29, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO RESET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, District Judge. The United States of America, through its counsels of record, Benjamin B. Wagner, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, and William S. Wong, Assistant United States Attorney, and defendant SERGIO ADRIAN RAMIREZ, through his counsel, Gilbert Roque, Esq., stipulate and agree to the following revised briefing schedule and hearing regarding the defendant's motion to suppress e
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO RESET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING

LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, District Judge.

The United States of America, through its counsels of record, Benjamin B. Wagner, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of California, and William S. Wong, Assistant United States Attorney, and defendant SERGIO ADRIAN RAMIREZ, through his counsel, Gilbert Roque, Esq., stipulate and agree to the following revised briefing schedule and hearing regarding the defendant's motion to suppress evidence currently set for February 5, 2013, at 9:15 a.m.:

1. Government's response shall be filed no later than February 8, 2013; 2. Defendant's reply, if any, shall be filed no later than February 15, 2013; and 3. A non-evidentiary hearing on the motion to be set for February 26, 2013, at 9:15 a.m.

Because of the issues raised by the defendant's motion to suppress evidence, the government conducted further investigation and obtained additional discovery which addresses the issue raised by the defendant. The government will provide that information to the defendant to allow the defendant an opportunity to reconsider the government's initial offer to resolve the case. Once the defendant makes his decision, the government will need time to either to prepare a plea a agreement or respond to the defendant's motion to suppress evidence.

If the defendant decides to proceed with its motion, time will be needed for the government to conduct further legal research and write its opposition to the defendant's motion to suppress evidence. Defense counsel then needs additional time to respond. Accordingly, the parties stipulate to the revised law and motion schedule and request that time be excluded pursuant to Local Code E and T-4.

Respectfully submitted, DATED: January 25, 2013 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney By: /s/William S. Wong WILLIAM S. WONG Assistant U.S. Attorney DATED: January 25, 2013 By: /s/Gilbert Roque GILBERT ROQUE Attorney for Defendant

ORDER TO RESET BRIEFING SCHEDULE AND HEARING

For the reasons set forth above, the revised law and motion schedule is adopted. Since the defendant has filed his motion to suppress evidence, time will continue to be excluded because of the pending motion pursuant to Local Code E and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D), and Local Code T-4 from the filing of the motion to February 26, 2013. The court finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

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