Filed: Jan. 30, 2014
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2014
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND SET MOTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE, ORDER THEREON LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, LAUREL J. MONTOYA, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for plaintiff; ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant Jose Guadalupe Cisneros; and DANIEL L. HARRALSON, counsel for defendant Carlos Guillermo Barajas, that the date for status conference i
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND SET MOTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE, ORDER THEREON LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge. IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, LAUREL J. MONTOYA, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for plaintiff; ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant Jose Guadalupe Cisneros; and DANIEL L. HARRALSON, counsel for defendant Carlos Guillermo Barajas, that the date for status conference in..
More
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND SET MOTION BRIEFING SCHEDULE, ORDER THEREON
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, LAUREL J. MONTOYA, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for plaintiff; ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant Jose Guadalupe Cisneros; and DANIEL L. HARRALSON, counsel for defendant Carlos Guillermo Barajas, that the date for status conference in this matter may be continued to April 7, 2014, or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the court. It is further requested that a motion filing schedule be set, with motions due March 10, 2014, any response due March 31, 2014, and said motions be heard April 7, 2014. The date currently set for status conference is February 3, 2014. The requested new date is April 14, 2014. If an evidentiary will be needed the court will be notified to allow the hearing to be set at a time convenient to the court.
The evidence in this case was discovered after the defendants were stopped by law enforcement while traveling in a vehicle. The defense believes the legality of the stop is suspect. This continuance is requested to allow time for additional investigation and negotiations in an effort to reach a negotiated settlement in lieu of litigating the merits of the stop. If the matter cannot be resolved the defense will be filing a motion to suppress the evidence.
The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded as necessary for ruling on the motions and effective defense preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§§3161(h)(1)(D), 3161(h)(7)(A) and 3161(B)(iv). For this reason, the ends of justice served by the granting of the requested continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
ORDER
This stipulation is REJECTED. There was already a motions schedule set and ignored.
The current hearing for February 3rd will remain on as a TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
