Filed: May 13, 2015
Latest Update: May 13, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM OTHERWISE APPLICABLE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . STIPULATION IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through undersigned counsel, that: 1. The parties were originally scheduled to appear before the Court on May 12, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. for a status hearing or change of plea. Due to a scheduling conflict, the Court requested that the parties confer about a new date in this matter. 2. Accordingly,
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM OTHERWISE APPLICABLE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION RICHARD SEEBORG , District Judge . STIPULATION IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through undersigned counsel, that: 1. The parties were originally scheduled to appear before the Court on May 12, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. for a status hearing or change of plea. Due to a scheduling conflict, the Court requested that the parties confer about a new date in this matter. 2. Accordingly, t..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM OTHERWISE APPLICABLE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION
RICHARD SEEBORG, District Judge.
STIPULATION
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through undersigned counsel, that:
1. The parties were originally scheduled to appear before the Court on May 12, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. for a status hearing or change of plea. Due to a scheduling conflict, the Court requested that the parties confer about a new date in this matter.
2. Accordingly, the parties discussed rescheduling this matter to May 19, 2015 at 2:30 p.m., with the understanding that the parties would submit a Stipulation and Proposed Order excluding time.
3. The parties now formalize their request for a continuance of this matter to May 19, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. for a further status conference, and respectfully submit and agree that the period from May 12, 2015 through and including May 19, 2015 should be excluded from the otherwise applicable Speedy Trial Act computation because the continuance is necessary for effective preparation of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Specifically, the time requested for exclusion will allow defense counsel to review the discovery provided by the Government, which includes the certified copy of the computer automated dispatch (CAD) printout from this case.
IT IS SO STIPULATED. MELINDA HAAG
[PROPOSED] ORDER
Based upon the above-described Stipulation, THE COURT FINDS THAT the ends of justice served by granting a continuance from May 12, 2015 through and including May 19, 2015 outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and that failure to grant such a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
Accordingly, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. The parties shall appear before the Court on May 19, 2015 at 2:30 p.m. for a further status conference.
2. The period from May 12, 2015 through and including May 19, 2015 is excluded from the otherwise applicable Speedy Trial Act computation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
