Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Pfeiffer, 1:14CR000222-LJO-SKO. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160307428 Visitors: 16
Filed: Mar. 04, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 04, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and Defendant, by and through his counsel of record, stipulate to continue the status conference in his matter, current set for March 7, 2016, to April 11, 2015, at 8:30 a.m. The parties agree this continuance is necessary to allow permit defense counsel to recover from knee surgery that occurred on February 26, 2016, which has limit
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and Defendant, by and through his counsel of record, stipulate to continue the status conference in his matter, current set for March 7, 2016, to April 11, 2015, at 8:30 a.m.

The parties agree this continuance is necessary to allow permit defense counsel to recover from knee surgery that occurred on February 26, 2016, which has limited his mobility and affected his ability to work on this case. The parties have engaged in substantial settlement negotiations and it is anticipated that a formal offer will be made by March 4, 2016. The requested continuance will allow sufficient time for defense counsel to recover and for consideration of the offer.

The parties agree to exclude time until April 11, 2016, and agree that the continuance of the hearing date will serve the ends of justice, and that the need for a continuance outweighs the interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial, and that the delay occasioned by such continuance is excluded from the Speedy Trial Act's time limits pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

Based on the stipulation of counsel and for good cause, it is ORDERED that the status hearing (For change of plea or trial setting) in this matter is continued from March 7, 2016, to April 11, 2016, at 8:30 a.m. The court further finds that the ends of justice served by a continuance outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and that the delay occasioned by such continuance is excluded from the Speedy Trial Act's time limits pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

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