Filed: Mar. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 29, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and Defendant John Alan Ballard, by and through his counsels of record, Judy Irene Calderon, by and through her counsel of record, Sherry Lynn Herbert, by and through her counsels of record, Andrea Rachelle Todd, by and through her counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter wa
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE SHEILA K. OBERTO , Magistrate Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and Defendant John Alan Ballard, by and through his counsels of record, Judy Irene Calderon, by and through her counsel of record, Sherry Lynn Herbert, by and through her counsels of record, Andrea Rachelle Todd, by and through her counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
SHEILA K. OBERTO, Magistrate Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and Defendant John Alan Ballard, by and through his counsels of record, Judy Irene Calderon, by and through her counsel of record, Sherry Lynn Herbert, by and through her counsels of record, Andrea Rachelle Todd, by and through her counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on April 2, 2018 at 1:00 p.m. and time was ordered excluded in the interest of justice.
2. By this stipulation, the parties hereby move to continue the status conference to June 4, 2018 because counsels for the defendants need additional time to properly prepare a defense. Counsels for the defendants believe that failure to grant the above requested continuance would deny them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence and the Government does not object to the continuance.
3. 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 defendants in a trial within the original dates prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
4. 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 2, 2018 to June 5, 2018, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at the defendant's request on the basis of the Court's findings that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
5. 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.
ORDER
The parties' request for a continuance of the status conference is GRANTED.
The parties are cautioned that any further request for an extension of time must be supported by good cause and shall include a detailed explanation demonstrating due diligence, including a description of what actions have been undertaken, and what further actions are needed, to move the case forward. Counsel's general statement alone regarding the need for additional time to prepare a defense is insufficient.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
