Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. DABESTANI, CR 12-708 EJD. (2013)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20130222b40 Visitors: 3
Filed: Feb. 21, 2013
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2013
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME FROM SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge. The parties stipulate as follows: 1. This case is set for status before Judge Edward J. Davila on February 25, 2013, at 1:30 p.m. 2. The parties seek the Court's permission to vacate the status hearing set for February 25, 2013 and continue it to April 15, 2013, at 1:30 pm for the following reasons: government counsel is unavailable on February 2
More

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME FROM SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION

EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge.

The parties stipulate as follows:

1. This case is set for status before Judge Edward J. Davila on February 25, 2013, at 1:30 p.m.

2. The parties seek the Court's permission to vacate the status hearing set for February 25, 2013 and continue it to April 15, 2013, at 1:30 pm for the following reasons: government counsel is unavailable on February 25, 2013, the parties are continuing to meet and confer on matters related to the case, and defense counsel is continuing to review discovery produced by the government.

3. The parties further request that time be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, from February 25, 2013 to April 15, 2013, for defense counsel's effective preparation. The defense requests the time to review materials previously provided by the United States in discovery.

STIPULATED:

ORDER

Based on the parties' stipulation, the Court finds and holds, as follows:

1. The status conference set for February 25, 2013 is vacated. The status conference is continued to April 15, 2013 at 1:30pm.

2. Time is excluded from calculation under the seventy-day time limit for the commencement of trial under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1). The United States has provided materials to defense counsel, and counsel needs additional time to review those materials. Thus, there is good cause for the exclusion under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 for effective preparation of defense counsel, and the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and of the defendant in a speedy trial and the prompt disposition of criminal cases. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). The Court further finds that failure to grant the continuance would deny counsel for all parties reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

3. Accordingly, and with the consent of the defendant, the Court orders that the period from February 25, 2013 to April 15, 2013 be excluded from Speedy Trial Act calculations under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

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