Filed: May 29, 2015
Latest Update: May 29, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER THEREON MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 28, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 23, 2015, and to exclude time between May 28, 2015, and July 23, 2015, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) T
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER THEREON MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 28, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 23, 2015, and to exclude time between May 28, 2015, and July 23, 2015, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) Th..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER THEREON
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 28, 2015.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until July 23, 2015, and to exclude time between May 28, 2015, and July 23, 2015, 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 170 pages and two DVD. photographs. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendants desire additional time to review discovery and to confer with their clients concerning discovery in the presence of a Cantonese interpreter. There has been some delay in counsel conferring with their clients because of the difficulty securing and scheduling a Cantonese interpreter.
c) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) The government does not object to the continuance.
e) 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.
f) 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 May 28, 2015 to July 23, 2015, 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 defendants' 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.
FINDINGS AND ORDER
In accordance with the foregoing stipulation, and good cause appearing, IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED. The status conference in this matter is continued from May 28, 2015 to July 23, 2015 at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom No. 7.
