Filed: Jul. 09, 2018
Latest Update: Jul. 09, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 12, 2018. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 30, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between July 12, 2018, and August 30, 2018, under Local Codes T2 and T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the follow
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER TROY L. NUNLEY , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 12, 2018. 2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 30, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between July 12, 2018, and August 30, 2018, under Local Codes T2 and T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the followi..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 12, 2018.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 30, 2018, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between July 12, 2018, and August 30, 2018, under Local Codes T2 and 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 several hundred pages of investigative reports and hours of recorded phones calls from five different cellular telephones. All of this discovery has been produced directly to counsel.
b) Counsel for the defendants desire additional time review the expansive discovery in this case; conduct investigation related to the discovery; consult with their clients with respect to the charges, evidences, and proceedings; and otherwise prepare for trial in this matter.
c) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel 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 July 12, 2018, to August 30, 2018, 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 defendants' 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.
g) Additionally, an exclusion of time under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) (Local Code T2) is appropriate given the complexity of this case involving ten defendants and five wiretapped cellular telephones.
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.
