Filed: Oct. 05, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 05, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on October 8, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until November 5, 2015, and to exclude time between October 8, 2015, and November 5, 2015, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) The gov
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on October 8, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until November 5, 2015, and to exclude time between October 8, 2015, and November 5, 2015, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) The gove..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on October 8, 2015.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until November 5, 2015, and to exclude time between October 8, 2015, and November 5, 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 investigative reports and related documents, as well as tax documents, bank records and other documents obtained via subpoena. The government estimates that this discovery consists of more than 2,000 pages of documents. All of this discovery has been produced directly to counsel and/or has been made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendant Shchirskiy is currently in trial, and therefore needs additional time to prepare for this case. He needs additional time to consult with his client, review the current charges, review the discovery, conduct investigation and research related to the charges, and to otherwise prepare for trial, if necessary. The codefendants are not severed. Additionally, counsel for Atamanyuk needs additional time to investigate the case in light of a pending plea offer.
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 defendants 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 October 8, 2015 to November 5, 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 defendants 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.
