Filed: Nov. 30, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 30, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , Chief District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on November 20, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 10, 2015, and to exclu
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr. , Chief District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on November 20, 2015. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 10, 2015, and to exclud..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; ORDER
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on November 20, 2015.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until December 10, 2015, and to exclude time between November 20, 2015, and December 10, 2015, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The discovery associated with this case includes more than 9,000 pages of discovery, which includes investigative reports and other documents.
b) Counsel for Mr. Lopez requires additional time to review discovery and confer with him. Counsel for Mr. Lopez anticipates that the government will soon propound a plea agreement that may resolve this case and a potential case in the Northern District of California, and requires time to review the plea agreement with Mr. Lopez in light of the discovery, and to negotiate with the government in an effort to resolve these matters short of trial.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her 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 November 20, 2015 to December 10, 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 defendant's 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.
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.
