STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel, Assistant United States Attorney Josh F. Sigal, defendant, David Schell, by and through his counsel, John R. Duree, Jr., and defendant, Teri Schell, by and through her counsel, Erin J. Radekin, agree and stipulate to vacate the date set for status conference, September 6, 2016 at 9:15 a.m., in the above-captioned matter, and to continue the status conference to October 11, 2016 at 9:15 a.m. in the courtroom of the Honorable John A. Mendez.

The government has provided plea agreements to both defendants. It is a package deal. The defense has responded with counteroffers which take into consideration new case law — United States v. McIntosh, 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 15029 (9th Cir.), decided on August 16, 2016. In that case the Ninth Circuit held the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, Pub. L. No. 114-113, § 542, 129 Stat. 2242, 2332-33 (2015), prohibits the DOJ from spending funds from relevant appropriations acts to prosecute individuals who engaged in conduct permitted by state medical marijuana laws. Under McIntosh, a defendant in a federal marijuana prosecution can bring a motion to dismiss or enjoin prosecution on the ground he or she is "strictly compliant" with state medical marijuana law, and is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on that issue. McIntosh, supra, at p. 30. The parties need to review the impact of McIntosh on the plea negotiations, discovery and the factual bases set forth in the plea agreements in this case, and the government needs to consider the counteroffers, as well as additional law cited by Ms. Schell. The Court is advised that Mr. Sigal concurs with this request and that he and Mr. Duree have authorized Ms. Radekin to sign this stipulation on their behalf.

The parties further agree and stipulate that the time period from the filing of this stipulation until October 11, 2016 should be excluded in computing time for commencement of trial under the Speedy Trial Act, based upon the interest of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), and Local Code T4, to allow reasonable time necessary for effective defense preparation. It is further agreed and stipulated that the ends of justice served in granting the request outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Accordingly, the parties respectfully request the Court adopt this proposed stipulation.

IT IS SO STIPULATED

ORDER

For the reasons set forth in the accompanying stipulation and declaration of counsel, the status conference date of September 6, 2016 at 9:15 a.m. is VACATED and the above-captioned matter is set for status conference on October 11, 2016 at 9:15 a.m. The Court finds excludable time in this matter through October 11, 2016 under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, to allow reasonable time necessary for effective defense preparation. For the reasons stipulated by the parties, the Court finds that the interest of justice served by granting the request outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A), (h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.