STIPULATION AND ORDER TO SET MATTER FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING ON CONTEMPENCY EVALUATION AND REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 21, 2016.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to set the matter for an evidentiary hearing on his competency motion for March 3, 2016 at 1:30 p.m., and to exclude time between January 21, 2016 and March 3, 2016 under Local Codes T4 and A. The United States does not oppose this request.

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, workers' compensation benefits records, bank records, and other related documents in electronic form constituting approximately 2600 pages of documents. All of this discovery has been produced directly to counsel.

b. New defense counsel was appointed in May 2015 and has now received the discovery as well as the report prepared relating to the defendant's competency to stand trial.

c. Counsel has also received a copy of the transcript of the competency hearing and has requested to question the physician who conducted the mental examination as permitted by the Court.

d. Counsel for defendant desires additional time to prepare for the in-court hearing, to consult with his client and to review discovery for this matter, to engage in discussions with the United States regarding potential resolution, for which he will need to review discovery provided and the information provided to the United States, and to otherwise prepare for trial.

e. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

f. The government does not object to the continuance.

g. 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.

h. 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 January 21, 2016 to March 3, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] and § 3161(h)(1)(A) (Local Code A) 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 FOUND AND ORDERED.