Filed: Jun. 13, 2019
Latest Update: Jun. 13, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. , Senior District Judge . The United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Timothy H. Delgado, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Shane Brayton, John R. Manning, Esq., hereby stipulate the following: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on June 14, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, the defendant n
Summary: STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. , Senior District Judge . The United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Timothy H. Delgado, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Shane Brayton, John R. Manning, Esq., hereby stipulate the following: 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on June 14, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, the defendant no..
More
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR., Senior District Judge.
The United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Timothy H. Delgado, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Shane Brayton, John R. Manning, Esq., hereby stipulate the following:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on June 14, 2019.
2. By this stipulation, the defendant now moves to continue the status conferece until July 26, 2019 and to exclude time between June 14, 2019 and July 26, 2019 under the Local Code T-4 (to allow defense counsel time to prepare).
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request the Court find the following:
a. This case includes over 200 pages of discovery and a video.
b. Counsel for Mr. Brayton is reviewing the case law related to filing a suppression motion on behalf of Mr. Brayton. To that end, counsel for Mr. Brayton has requested additional information from the government via an informal discovery request. The government is in the process of responding to the informal discovery request. Depending on what is produced (and/or, what is not produced) a discovery motion and/or a suppression motion may be filed by the defense.
c. The parties met on March 19, 2019, to discuss and review case law related to Rodriguez, 135 S.Ct. 1609 (2015); Evans, 786 F.3d 779 (9th Cir. 2015); Landeros 2019 WL 166120 (9th Cir. Jan. 11. 2019); and, any related (relevant) progeny. As a result, the government is examining and deliberating their options going forward. Simultaneously, the government, in light of the afore mentioned meeting, is also examining and deliberating their response the defense's long standing discovery request(s).
d. Because of relatively unique factual and legal issues related to this case, the government is discussing their response(s) at the Supervisorial level. As such, the government has asked for additional time to prepare their responses.
e. Counsel for the defendant believes 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.
f. The Government does not object to the continuance.
g. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
h. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) within which trial must commence, the time period of June 14, 2019 to July 26, 2019, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A)) and (B)(ii) and (iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4 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.
Dated: June 13, 2019 /s/John R. Manning
JOHN R. MANNING
Attorney for Defendant
Shane Brayton
Dated: June 13, 2019 McGregor W. Scott
United States Attorney
by: /s/Timothy Delgado
TIMOTHY H. DELGADO
Assistant U.S. Attorney
ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.
