STIPULATION TO CONTINUE CONTESTED HEARING AND [ORDER THEREON

LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, MICHAEL TIERNEY, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for plaintiff, and ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant William Hughes, that the contested hearing in this matter may be continued to February 9, 2015, or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the court. The date currently set for contested hearing is January 20, 2015. The requested new date is February 9, 2015.

Mr. Hughes is charged with violating his conditions of supervised release. The attorney who originally represented Mr. Hughes has retired from the Office of the Federal Defender and Mr. Hughes was represented at his initial hearing by a duty attorney. The matter was set for a contested hearing at that time, and the case was subsequently assigned to undersigned defense counsel, who was on leave. Upon returning from leave I learned the matter was scheduled for a hearing on January 20, 2015, but I believed this was a status conference. I did not learn it was set for a contested hearing until Tuesday, January 13. I have since spoken to probation and Mr. Hughes and believe it may be possible to resolve this matter without a contested hearing, but additional time is needed for further discussions. In addition, I am not available for a contested hearing on January 20 because my attendance is required at previously scheduled committee meeting that is also scheduled for January 20, at 2:00 p.m.

Defense counsel has also been advised that the government just received a forensic report on the cell phone that Mr. Hughes is charged with possessing. In order to effectively represent Mr. Hughes, defense counsel needs additional time to receive and review this report, and to investigate its findings. For these reasons it is requested that the contested hearing scheduled for January 20, 2015 be continued to February 9, 2015. If the parties are able to resolve this matter without a contested hearing, the court will be promptly notified.

The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded as necessary for continuity of counsel and effective defense preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (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

The intervening period of delay is excluded in the interests of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.