STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUSION OF TIME

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

The parties in this case agree and jointly request the Court to move the hearing in the above captioned case from September 23, 2015 at 2:30 pm to December 23, 2015 at 2:30 pm. The reason for this request is to allow the defendant's expert to complete neuropsychological testing. Defendant is facing a 25 year mandatory minimum sentence. The defendant has already obtained medical records, records from prior convictions, dependancy records, as well as records from defendant's mother's conviction for child abuse. The records obtained are voluminous and multiple members of the Federal Public Defender's Office are reviewing the records to create a chronology of Defendant's life. The records concern the Defendant's intellectual disability, his major psychiatric disorder, his seizure disorder, and the child abuse he suffered. In addition, though this Court signed an Order permitting the neuropsych testing, due to staffing issues with the jail, the testing was not performed on the day the Court ordered it, and defense counsel is still working on getting the expert into the jail for a second day of testing.

The parties concur that granting the exclusion would allow the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of counsel and continuity of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties also agree that the ends of justice served by granting such an exclusion of time for the purposes of effective preparation of counsel outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

Accordingly, due to the reasons stated above, the parties jointly move to continue the hearing to December 23, 2015 at 2:30 p.m.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

For the reasons stated above the Court hereby CONTINUES the hearing in the aforementioned case from September 23, 2015 at 2:30 pm to December 23, 2015 at 2:30 pm. The Court further finds that the exclusion from the time limits of this period applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 is warranted and that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Denying the requested exclusion of time would deprive the defendant effective preparation of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.