Filed: Apr. 25, 2017
Latest Update: Apr. 25, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 27, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 8, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to ex
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 27, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 8, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exc..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 27, 2017.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 8, 2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between April 27, 2017, and June 8, 2017, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case includes approximately 440 pages of investigative reports and related documents in electronic format, and an audio recording of the defendant's statement to law enforcement. This discovery was produced on January 25, 2017. In addition, there are electronic devices that were seized from the defendant's residence, which contain material restricted by 18 U.S.C. § 3509(m), that have been made available for inspection.
b) Counsel for the defendant has reviewed the discovery, but requires additional time to talk with his client and discuss potential resolutions. Counsel for the defendant is requesting that the status conference be set on June 8, 2017, because between now and then counsel will be on leave for one week and has a competency trial in a murder case, People v. Baker, Placer County case no. 62-106623, beginning on May 23, 2017, that he anticipates will last three weeks.
c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) The government does not object to the continuance.
e) 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.
f) 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 April 27, 2017 to June 8, 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.
THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK
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.
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
