Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. Young, 2:18-CR-0142-JAM. (2019)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20190423889 Visitors: 13
Filed: Apr. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . Plaintiff United States of America, through its undersigned counsel, and defendants Dean Orland Young, Jr. and Isaiah Elijah Cole, through their respective counsel, stipulate that the status conference currently set for April 23, 2019, be continued to July 16, 2019, at 9:15 a.m. On July 27, 2018, Mr. Young was arraigned on the six-count Indictment in this case. (ECF Nos. 18, 21.) Mr. Cole was arraigned th
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

Plaintiff United States of America, through its undersigned counsel, and defendants Dean Orland Young, Jr. and Isaiah Elijah Cole, through their respective counsel, stipulate that the status conference currently set for April 23, 2019, be continued to July 16, 2019, at 9:15 a.m.

On July 27, 2018, Mr. Young was arraigned on the six-count Indictment in this case. (ECF Nos. 18, 21.) Mr. Cole was arraigned three days later. (ECF No. 22.) In the days following, the government produced to the defense discovery that includes 219 pages of reports and memoranda, 445 photos, and a litany of audio and video recordings. Counsel for both defendants require additional time to review these materials, to discuss them with their clients, to conduct research into any potential suppression issues or motions to dismiss, to conduct additional investigation, and to otherwise prepare for trial. In addition, in the coming weeks, the government anticipates producing additional discovery that will include forensic data from one or more cellular phones, and several additional audio and video files.

Based on the foregoing, the parties stipulate that the status conference currently set for April 23, 2019, be continued to July 16, 2019, at 9:15 a.m. The parties further agree that time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded from the date the parties stipulated, to and including July 16, 2019, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) [reasonable time to prepare], and General Order 479, [Local Code T4], based on continuity of counsel and defense preparation.

The parties agree that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The parties also agree that the ends of justice served by the Court granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

ORDER

The Court, having received and considered the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing therefore, adopts the parties' stipulation in its entirety as its order. The Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court also finds that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

The Court orders that the time from the date the parties stipulated, to and including July 16, 2019, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial in this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, see 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) [reasonable time to prepare], and General Order 479 [Local Code T4]. It is further ordered that the April 23, 2019 status conference be continued to July 16, 2019, at 9:15 a.m.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer