Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. AGUIRRE, 5:16-po-00047 JLT. (2016)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20160520941 Visitors: 10
Filed: May 19, 2016
Latest Update: May 19, 2016
Summary: REQUEST TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE; [ PROPOSED ] ORDER JENNIFER L. THURSTON , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY REQUESTED, by ROBERT L. AGUIRRE that the status conference set for May 19, 2016, be continued to August 2, 2016, at 9:00 a.m. The defendant has posted a $2,000 cash bond as ordered by the court, and has confirmed with counsel that he will be personally present for the next court hearing. The purpose of the May 19, 2016 status conference was to confirm the status of the bond and
More

REQUEST TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE; [PROPOSED] ORDER

IT IS HEREBY REQUESTED, by ROBERT L. AGUIRRE that the status conference set for May 19, 2016, be continued to August 2, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.

The defendant has posted a $2,000 cash bond as ordered by the court, and has confirmed with counsel that he will be personally present for the next court hearing. The purpose of the May 19, 2016 status conference was to confirm the status of the bond and to explore why defendant did not appear at the last hearing. As explained in a prior communication with the courtroom deputy and counsel for the government, defendant was not aware of the May 3, 2016 court date for which he failed to appear. He will be present at all future court days unless a waiver of appearance is granted at some future time. No waiver of appearance is requested at this time.

The continuance is requested with the intention of conserving time and resources for both the parties and the Court. The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded in the interests of justice, including but not limited to, the need for the period of time set forth herein for effective defense preparation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (iv).

ORDER

Though the Court understands that the defendant has told his attorney that he was unaware of his obligation to appear at court on May 3, 2016, this explanation is false. When Mr. Aguirre was arrested and brought to court on April 19, 2016—after having failed to appear on April 5, 2016—the Court explicitly ordered Mr. Aguirre to appear on May 3, 2016 and Mr. Aguirre acknowledged his obligation to appear. Indeed, the Court admonished Mr. Aguirre that his failure to appear would result in deputies from the U.S. Marshal Service again arresting him and bringing him to court and would forfeit the cash bond.

In any event, because the purpose of the status conference was to confirm the cash bond was paid and that Mr. Aguirre would appear at the future hearings—which has occurred—the Court ORDERS:

1. The status conference in United States v. Aguirre, Case Number 5:16-po-00121-JLT, is continued to August 2, 2016, at 9:00 a.m.; 2. Mr. Aguirre SHALL appear on August 2, 2016 at 9:00 a.m.; 3. In order to allow his counsel to review discovery and to have communications with the government, the Court finds that good cause exists and the interests of justice outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Time is excluded pending the next hearing on August 2, 2016.

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