USA v. Humphrey, 2:16-cr-0210-TLN. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20171207885
Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 05, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on December 7, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from December 7 to March 22, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on December 7, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from December 7 to March 22, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between D..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Defendant Claudia Humphrey, by and through her counsel of record Randy Sue Pollock, and Assistant United States Attorney Todd Pickles hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order this matter was set for a status hearing on December 7, 2017.
2. By this stipulation, defendant Humphrey now moves to continue the status hearing from December 7 to March 22, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between December 7, 2017 and March 22, 2018 under Local Codes T4 and T2. The United States does not oppose this request given the amount of financial records that must be reviewed by the defense. To date, 21, 000 pages of discovery has been provided by the government.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a. To date over 21,000 pages of discovery has been provided which include a large amount of financial records.
b. Counsel for the defendant desires additional time to review the discovery, consult with the defendant and conduct investigation.
c. Counsel for the defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, considering the exercise of due diligence;
d. 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;
e. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time of December 7, 2017 through March 22, 2018, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 3161 (h0(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.
f. 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 AND ORDERED:
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
