Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. MILLS, 2:13-mj-0208 KJN. (2013)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20130828873 Visitors: 21
Filed: Aug. 27, 2013
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND [ PROPOSED ] ORDER CONTINUING PRELIMINARY HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney Jason Hitt, counsel for the plaintiff United States of America, and defendant Lindsey MILLS, by and through his counsel Candace Fry, Esq., that good cause exists to extend the preliminary hearing currently set for September 3, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. to September 10, 2013, pursuant to Federal Rule of Crimina
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING PRELIMINARY HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME

KENDALL J. NEWMAN, Magistrate Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney Jason Hitt, counsel for the plaintiff United States of America, and defendant Lindsey MILLS, by and through his counsel Candace Fry, Esq., that good cause exists to extend the preliminary hearing currently set for September 3, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. to September 10, 2013, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(d).

Good cause exists to extend the time for the preliminary hearing within meaning of Rule 5.1(d) because the defendant must review the initial production of discovery, including surveillance evidence from the drug purchases alleged in the Criminal Complaint. The co-defendant in this Criminal Complaint recently turned himself in and was ordered released on an unsecured bond. His preliminary hearing date was set for September 10, 2013. For these reasons, the defendant agrees that a continuance of the preliminary hearing date will not prejudice him.

The parties further stipulate that the ends of justice are served by the Court excluding time from September 3, 2013, to September 10, 2013, so that counsel for the defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Specifically, the defense agrees that it needs time to review discovery and effectively evaluate the posture of the case, and conduct further investigation into mitigation of the defendant's federal sentencing exposure in this case, and any possible defenses he may have to the charges. Id. In addition, co-defendant James SHERMAN was recently arrested and his arraignment date was set for September 10, 2013. The parties believe one arraignment date for both defendants would be a more efficient use of the Court resources rather than having two separate arraignment dates. For these reasons, the defendant, defense counsel, and the government stipulate and agree that the ends of justice outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A); Local Code T4.

ORDER

Based upon the representations by counsel and the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court finds good cause to extend the Preliminary Hearing in United States v. Mills, Case No. 2:13-mj-00208 KJN, from September 3, 2013, to September 10, 2013, at 2:00 p.m. pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(d); and

2. Based upon the representations and stipulation of the parties, the court finds that the time exclusion under 18 U.S.C. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and Local Code T4 applies and the ends of justice outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial based upon the factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Accordingly, time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded from September 3, 2013, up to and including September 10, 2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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