Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. GOMEZ-RODRIGUEZ, 1:15-cr-00226-LJO-SKO. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160129a27 Visitors: 16
Filed: Jan. 28, 2016
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE; EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIOD UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT AND FINDINGS AND ORDER SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on February 1, 2016 at 1 p.m. 2. By this stipulation, the parties move to continue the status conference to February
More

STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE; EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIOD UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT AND FINDINGS AND ORDER

STIPULATION

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

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on February 1, 2016 at 1 p.m.

2. By this stipulation, the parties move to continue the status conference to February 29, 2016, in order to further plea negotiations, conduct additional investigation and potentially resolve the matter.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

a. The parties need additional time to assess a potential disposition of the case and/or conduct additional investigation and/or prepare for trial.

b. The parties believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny the defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective resolution, further investigation, and/or trial preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and would deny the government continuity of counsel.

c. 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.

d. 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 February 1, 2016, to February 29, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at the parties' 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.

ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' Stipulation, the status conference hearing presently set for Monday, February 1, 2016, at 1:00 p.m. is hereby vacated and rescheduled for Monday, February 29, 2016, at 1:00 p.m. It is further ordered that time be excluded in the interests of justice based on the grounds set forth in the parties' Stipulation, through and including the continued status conference date of February 29, 2016, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (7)(B)(iv), in that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

The parties shall be prepared to select a mutually agreeable trial date at the next status conference.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer