STIPULATION REGARDING CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE/CHANGE OF PLEA; FINDINGS AND ORDER

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

Defendant, JUSTIN CANNON, by and through his counsel of record, TONI WHITE, and the GOVERNMENT hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on June 15, 2016.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 30, 2016, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between June 15, 2016 and June 30, 2016 under Local Code T4. The GOVERNMENT does not oppose this request.

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

a. The United States has represented that the discovery associated with this case to date, and provided to defense counsel, includes investigative reports and related documents in electronic form amounting to approximately 20 pages of documents. There is extensive physical evidence beyond the discovery reports. Defense counsel needs additional time to review the discovery and evidence, meet with Mr. Cannon and discuss the case further with the AUSA. Additionally, Mr. Cannon has recently completed a state court sentence that may factor into plea negotiations in this matter. Counsel for Mr. Cannon and Counsel for the Government need additional time to receive more information regarding the state case before Mr. Cannon's matter can be brought to resolution. The Parties are very close to resolution. A draft plea agreement has recently been proposed and the parties are continuing to work out details of an offer. The draft plea agreement has been reviewed with Mr. Cannon, additional concerns were raised, and the Parties are working through the additional concerns. The Parties are gathering additional documentation to address those concerns.

b. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

c. The GOVERNMENT does not object to the continuance.

d. The GOVERNMENT and counsel for the defendant are working toward resolution of the case.

g. 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.

g. 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 June 15, 2016 and June 30, 2016 inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's 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.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.