Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. VALENZUELA, 2:12-cr-358 GEB. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130821953 Visitors: 11
Filed: Aug. 19, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 19, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge. It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through CHRISTIAAN HIGHSMITH, Assistant U.S. Attorney; defendant ADRES VALENZUELA by and through his counsel, BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, Assistant Federal Defender; and defendant ARISTO HERRERA, by and through his counsel, DINA SANTOS, that the status conference set for Friday, August 23, 2013 be conti
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME

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

It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through CHRISTIAAN HIGHSMITH, Assistant U.S. Attorney; defendant ADRES VALENZUELA by and through his counsel, BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, Assistant Federal Defender; and defendant ARISTO HERRERA, by and through his counsel, DINA SANTOS, that the status conference set for Friday, August 23, 2013 be continued to Friday, September 27, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendant, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case.

The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Speedy trial time is to be excluded from the date of this order through the date of the status conference set for September 27, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv)[reasonable time to prepare] (Local Code T4).

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. The Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial.

The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties stipulation, up to and including September 27, 2013, 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)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) (reasonable time for counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the August 23, 2013 status conference shall be continued until September 27, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.

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