Filed: Apr. 19, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 19, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 23, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m.
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 23, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m.,..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
STIPULATION
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on April 23, 2019.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 16, 2019 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between April 23, 2019, and July 16, 2019, under Local Code 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 approximately 60 pages of investigative reports, criminal history information, photographs and other documents. In addition, the discovery in United States v. Ramirez, et al., execution of the search warrant in this case (see Dkt. No. 22, Notice of Related Cases), consists of approximately 100 pages of written discovery, as well as numerous audio and video files and spreadsheets of calls and text messages. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) On or about March 20, 2019, the government produced additional audio/video discovery in Case No. 2:19-CR-00012-MCE.
c) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to review this discovery, to consult with her client, and to otherwise prepare for trial.
d) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. In particular, counsel for defendant has a trial scheduled in another case for June 10, 2019, that is expected to last two weeks.
e) The government does not object to the continuance.
f) 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.
g) 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 23, 2019 to July 16, 2019, 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 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.
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.
McGREGOR W. SCOTT
United States Attorney
/s/ DAVID W. SPENCER
DAVID W. SPENCER
Assistant United States Attorney
/s/ Hannah R. Labaree
Hannah R. Labaree
Counsel for Defendant
GUILLERMO JOSE LEON
RAMIREZ
FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
