Filed: Apr. 11, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 11, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING; ORDER OF DENIAL LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel RICHARD A. BESHWATE, JR., attorney for Defendant, and JEFFREY SPIVAK, Assistant U.S. Attorney for Plaintiff, that the hearing currently scheduled for April 16, 2018, shall be continued to MAY 21, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. This continuance is necessary due to counsel requires additional time to prepare for sen
Summary: STIPULATION ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING; ORDER OF DENIAL LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL , Chief District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel RICHARD A. BESHWATE, JR., attorney for Defendant, and JEFFREY SPIVAK, Assistant U.S. Attorney for Plaintiff, that the hearing currently scheduled for April 16, 2018, shall be continued to MAY 21, 2018, at 8:30 a.m. This continuance is necessary due to counsel requires additional time to prepare for sent..
More
STIPULATION ORDER TO CONTINUE HEARING; ORDER OF DENIAL
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, Chief District Judge.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel RICHARD A. BESHWATE, JR., attorney for Defendant, and JEFFREY SPIVAK, Assistant U.S. Attorney for Plaintiff, that the hearing currently scheduled for April 16, 2018, shall be continued to MAY 21, 2018, at 8:30 a.m.
This continuance is necessary due to counsel requires additional time to prepare for sentencing.
The parties stipulate that the time until the next hearing should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice are served by the court excluding such time, so that counsel for the defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice are served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A).
ORDER
THE MOTION TO CONTINUE IS DENIED. THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE FOR THE COURT TO CONCLUDE THAT GOOD LEGAL CAUSE EXISTS FOR THE DELAY.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
