STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.

The parties request that the status conference in this case be continued from June 28, 2013, to July 12, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. They stipulate that the time period between the date of this stipulation, June 27, 2013 and the new status conference on July 12, 2013, shall be excluded from the calculation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act. The parties stipulate that defense counsel needs additional time to review and examine the evidence, investigate the facts of the case, and to explain a plea agreement from the United States to defendant and the ramifications of proceeding to trial compared to accepting the plea offer. This plea negotiation process is made somewhat more complicated as there is an possible additional firearms charge that might be added in the event that the case does not settle that would subject defendant to a mandatory consecutive five years to life penalty upon conviction of the new charge. These tasks are made more difficult as defendant is a Spanish language speaker and a Spanish/English language interpreter is necessary to translate communications between defense counsel and defendant. The parties further stipulate that the Court should find that the continuance is necessary to provide defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4. The parties stipulate and agree that the Court should find the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4.

ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the status conference presently set for June 28, 2013, be continued to July 12, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, and the Court hereby finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. It is ordered that time from the date of the parties' stipulation, June 27, 2013, to and including, the new status conference on July 12, 2013, shall be excluded 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)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4.

IT IS ORDERED.