Filed: Nov. 15, 2019
Latest Update: Nov. 15, 2019
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order this case was set for status conference on November 19, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, the defendant asks to move the status conference until February 25, 2020 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between November 19, 2019 and February 25, 2020 under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: (a) The government has repr
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE JOHN A. MENDEZ , District Judge . STIPULATION 1. By previous order this case was set for status conference on November 19, 2019. 2. By this stipulation, the defendant asks to move the status conference until February 25, 2020 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between November 19, 2019 and February 25, 2020 under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: (a) The government has repre..
More
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
STIPULATION
1. By previous order this case was set for status conference on November 19, 2019.
2. By this stipulation, the defendant asks to move the status conference until February 25, 2020 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between November 19, 2019 and February 25, 2020 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 law enforcement reports, photographs and several hours of audio and video recordings. All of this discovery has been or will be produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
(b) Counsel for the defendant desires additional time to consult with her client, review the discovery, conduct investigation and otherwise prepare for trial.
(c) Counsel for the defendant believes failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them 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 defendants 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 November 19, 2019 to February 25, 2020, 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 defendants in a speedy trial.
Dated: November 15, 2019. Respectfully submitted,
By /s/ Kresta Nora Daly for
JAMES CONOLLY
ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
Dated: November 15, 2019. BARTH DALY LLP
By /s/ Kresta Nora Daly
KRESTA NORA DALY
Attorneys for MARIO CABRERA
ORDER
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING upon the stipulation of the parties it is ordered:
The status conference of November 19, 2019 is vacated. The status conference will be reset for February 25, 2020 at 9:15 a.m. The Court finds excludable time through February 25, 2020 under Title 18, United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4 to allow for preparation of counsel. The Court finds that the interests of justice are best served by granting the request and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), (h)(7)(B)(iv).)
IT IS SO ORDERED.
