STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTING TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING SPEEDY TRIAL ACT TIME

JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

Whereas, on April 18, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its mandate that the judgment of that Court entered March 25, 2013, reversing defendant Clemente Arroyo's convictions and sentences, take effect on that date;

Whereas, as a result of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals' ruling, Arroyo is entitled to a new trial and the District Court should conduct a trial setting conference to set a date for the new trial;

Whereas, Michael Chastaine, Esq., defense counsel for Arroyo is not available until May 14, 2013, to attend a trial setting conference, and

Whereas, the United States Marshals Service requires additional time to transport Arroyo from the Federal Correctional Institution at Allenwood, Pennsylvania (LOW) and is expected to deliver Arroyo to this district on May 23, 2013; and

Whereas, defense counsel desires to meet with Arroyo prior to appearing in Court to discuss and explain the following topics to Arroyo: the Ninth Circuit's ruling and the ruling's ramifications; a new settlement proposal from the United States that would resolve the case without a re-trial; and the benefits and risks of a re-trial. These tasks are made more difficult and additional time is needed because defense counsel needs to confer with Arroyo with the assistance of an English/Spanish language interpreter,

It is hereby stipulated by and between the parties, through their respective counsel, that:

1. The District Court shall set a trial setting conference on May 28, 2013, at 9:45 a.m.;

2. The District Court shall exclude time from the date of the parties' earlier stipulation, May 2, 2013, to and including the new May 28, 2013, trial setting conference date from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F) (transportation of defendant from another district) and (7)(A) and (B)(iv), and Local Code T4 (preparation of defense counsel continuity of defense counsel); and

3. The District Court shall find that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

ORDER

The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. Based on the stipulation of the parties and the recitation of facts contained therein, the Court finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defendant continuity of defense counsel. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties' original stipulation filed on May 2, 2013, to and including the new May 28, 2013, trial setting conference date shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F) (transportation of defendant from another district) and (7)(A) and (B) (iv), and Local Code T4 (continuity of defense counsel and preparation of defense counsel). It is further ordered that a trial setting conference shall be held on May 28, 2013, at 9:45 a.m.