Filed: Dec. 12, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2016
Summary: STIPULATION CONTINUING SENTENCING AND EXCLUDING TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . 1. By previous order of the Court, the defendant, Vithiya Tim ("Defendant"), was scheduled to be sentenced in case number 2:15-CR-00176 and case number 2:15-CR-00242, on December 15, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, Defendant now move to continue the sentencings in both of those matters to May 25, 2017, and to exclude time between December 15, 2016, and May
Summary: STIPULATION CONTINUING SENTENCING AND EXCLUDING TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . 1. By previous order of the Court, the defendant, Vithiya Tim ("Defendant"), was scheduled to be sentenced in case number 2:15-CR-00176 and case number 2:15-CR-00242, on December 15, 2016. 2. By this stipulation, Defendant now move to continue the sentencings in both of those matters to May 25, 2017, and to exclude time between December 15, 2016, and May ..
More
STIPULATION CONTINUING SENTENCING AND EXCLUDING TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
1. By previous order of the Court, the defendant, Vithiya Tim ("Defendant"), was scheduled to be sentenced in case number 2:15-CR-00176 and case number 2:15-CR-00242, on December 15, 2016.
2. By this stipulation, Defendant now move to continue the sentencings in both of those matters to May 25, 2017, and to exclude time between December 15, 2016, and May 25, 2017, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has produced to Defendant extensive discovery in these two cases (numbers 2:15-CR-00176 and 2:15-CR-00242), including disks containing video footage, photographs, and more than 47,000 pages of documents.
b) After negotiations, the parties reached a global resolution to the charges against Defendant in the separate Indictments in these matters. On or about September 29, 2016, Defendant entered guilty pleas to certain counts in the separate Indictments, pursuant to a written plea agreement.
c) Counsel for Defendant now requires additional time to review the extensive discovery in these matters and prepare for sentencing.
d) Counsel for Defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
e) The government does not object to the continuance.
f) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the sentencing as requested outweigh the interest of the public and 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 December 15, 2016 to May 25, 2017, 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.
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
