Filed: Aug. 07, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 07, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. STIPULATION 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, these related cases were set for status on August 22, 2013, and the Court advised the parties of its unavailability on that date. 2. By this stipulation, the parties now move to contin
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge. STIPULATION 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, these related cases were set for status on August 22, 2013, and the Court advised the parties of its unavailability on that date. 2. By this stipulation, the parties now move to continu..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
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, these related cases were set for status on August 22, 2013, and the Court advised the parties of its unavailability on that date.
2. By this stipulation, the parties now move to continue the status conference until September 12, 2013, and to exclude time between August 22, 2013, and September 12, 2013, under Local Code T4.
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 includes approximately 410 pages of documents, which was produced directly to defendant's prior counsel and forwarded to defendant's present counsel, who entered this case on or about July 2, 2013.
b) The parties have not yet received a Pre-Plea Advisory Guideline Presentence Investigation Report that addresses both the new indictment at issue in 2:13-cr-075 TLN, and the supervised release violation alleged in 2:13-cr-230 TLN ("Pre-Plea Report").
c) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to consult with her client and conduct investigation and research after receipt of the Pre-Plea Report, and in light of the discovery produced in this case.
d) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
e) The government does not object to the continuance.
f) 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.
g) 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 August 22, 2013, to September 12, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] 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 FOUND AND ORDERED.
