Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Arreazola, 2:13-CR-0052 TLN. (2017)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20170130668 Visitors: 17
Filed: Jan. 27, 2017
Latest Update: Jan. 27, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING SENTENCING TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, GILBERT ARREAZOLA alone, by and through his respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for sentencing on February 2, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the sentencing until March 2, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time betwee
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING SENTENCING

STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, GILBERT ARREAZOLA alone, by and through his respective counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for sentencing on February 2, 2017.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the sentencing until March 2, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between February 2, 2017, and March 2, 2017, under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

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

a. Counsel requests the additional time because of scheduling issues and the need to further consult with defendant re certain sentencing issues.

b. The government does not object to the continuance.

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 time period within which a trial must commence.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. Based on the representation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. It is ordered that time beginning from the parties' stipulation on January 27, 2017 up to and including the March 2, 2017, shall be excluded.

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