Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Orozco-Garcia, 2:15-cr-174 GEB. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160516642 Visitors: 15
Filed: May 12, 2016
Latest Update: May 12, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE, AND TO EXCLUDE TIME GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr. , Senior District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Phillip A. Talbert, Acting U.S. Attorney, through Katherine Lydon, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender Sean Riordan, attorney for Juan Orozco-Garcia, that the status conference scheduled for May 13, 2016 be vacated and be con
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE, AND TO EXCLUDE TIME

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Phillip A. Talbert, Acting U.S. Attorney, through Katherine Lydon, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender Sean Riordan, attorney for Juan Orozco-Garcia, that the status conference scheduled for May 13, 2016 be vacated and be continued to June 17, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.

Mr. Orozco-Garcia is currently located at MCFP Springfield undergoing evaluation for mental competency. The reasons for the continuance are for further evaluation of Mr. Orozco-Garcia and for counsel to receive a formal report from MCFP Springfield.

Based upon the foregoing, the parties agree time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded as of this order's date through and including June 17, 2016, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(1)(A) [delay resulting from any proceeding, including any examination, to determine mental competency or physical capacity of the defendant] and General Order 479 and Local Code A [exam for mental capacity].

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, the Court, having received, read, and considered the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the parties' stipulation in its entirety as its order. The Court specifically finds the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds the ends of justice are served by granting the requested continuance and outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial.

The Court orders the time from the date the parties stipulated, up to and including June 17, 2016, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(1)(A) [delay resulting from any proceeding, including any examination, to determine mental competency or physical capacity of the defendant] and General Order 479 and Local Code A [exam for mental capacity]. It is further ordered the May 13, 2016 status conference shall be continued until June 17, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.

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