Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. McCree, 2:12-CR-279 TLN. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160408e90 Visitors: 11
Filed: Apr. 06, 2016
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . This matter proceeded to an evidentiary hearing as to Defendant's competency on March 3, 2016. Following the hearing, the parties set a briefing schedule and continued the matter to April 7, 2016 in the event oral argument was necessary on the matter of competency. The parties further agreed to an exclusion of time up to and including April 7, 2016. On April 5, 201
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER SETTING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

This matter proceeded to an evidentiary hearing as to Defendant's competency on March 3, 2016. Following the hearing, the parties set a briefing schedule and continued the matter to April 7, 2016 in the event oral argument was necessary on the matter of competency. The parties further agreed to an exclusion of time up to and including April 7, 2016. On April 5, 2016, the Court issued an order (Docket Entry 77) denying a defense request for a second evaluation and finding the Defendant competent pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241.

The parties to this action, Plaintiff United States of America by and through Assistant United States Attorney Todd A. Pickles, and Defendant Michael McCree by and through his attorney Todd D. Leras, stipulate as follows:

1. By this stipulation, Defendant now moves to set the matter for a status conference on May 26, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between April 7, 2016 and May 26, 2016, under Local Code T-4. The United States does not oppose this request. 2. In light of the ruling on the competency issue, defense counsel has additional investigation to conduct in the matter. This investigation is necessary to ensure that potential defenses are explored and discussed with Mr. McCree. In addition, it is a prerequisite to determining whether the case may be resolved through a negotiated disposition. These matters could not be completed prior to resolution of the competency question. 3. Counsel for Defendant believes that failure to grant additional time as requested would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 4. Based on the above-stated facts, the parties jointly request that the Court find that the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a trial within the time prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. 5. 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 April 7, 2016 to May 26, 2016, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), and (B) (iv) [Local Code T-4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at Defendant's request on the basis that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial. 6. 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.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Todd Pickles has reviewed this proposed order and authorized Todd Leras to sign it on his behalf.

DATED: April 5, 2016 By Todd D. Leras for TODD A. PICKLES Assistant United States Attorney

ORDER

BASED ON THE REPRESENTATIONS AND STIPULATION OF THE PARTIES AND THE COURT'S MINUTE ORDER FINDING DEFENDANT COMPETENT PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 4241, it is hereby ordered that the control date in this matter scheduled for April 7, 2016, is vacated. A new status conference is scheduled for May 26, 2016, at 9:30 a.m. The Court further finds, based on the representations of the parties and Defendant's request, that the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Time shall be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow necessary attorney preparation taking into consideration the exercise of due diligence for the period from April 7, 2016, up to and including May 26, 2016.

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