U.S. v. JACKSON, CR 14-476-CRB. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20151120a53
Visitors: 12
Filed: Nov. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 19, 2015
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . The undersigned parties stipulate as follows: 1. A status conference is currently set before this Court on November 18, 2015 at 4:00 pm. As set forth in the Indictment, this case involves ten counts of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud; 2. New counsel for the government entered an appearance in this case only a few days ago. The parties accordingly need time to come up to
Summary: STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE CHARLES R. BREYER , District Judge . The undersigned parties stipulate as follows: 1. A status conference is currently set before this Court on November 18, 2015 at 4:00 pm. As set forth in the Indictment, this case involves ten counts of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud; 2. New counsel for the government entered an appearance in this case only a few days ago. The parties accordingly need time to come up to s..
More
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE
CHARLES R. BREYER, District Judge.
The undersigned parties stipulate as follows:
1. A status conference is currently set before this Court on November 18, 2015 at 4:00 pm. As set forth in the Indictment, this case involves ten counts of mail fraud and conspiracy to commit mail fraud;
2. New counsel for the government entered an appearance in this case only a few days ago. The parties accordingly need time to come up to speed and decide whether the case will be resolved by plea or jury trial. In any event, defense counsel hereby submits that were there to be a jury trial in this case, Ms. Jackson could not attend such a trial until the summer months in the year 2016, as she lives out of state in Coal Valley Illinois, has a minimum wage job, and supports 4 children who all need to attend school under her care and custody until this summer. Were this case to go to trial, Ms. Jackson would need to bring her children with her to California for the trial, as there is no one else who can properly care for them in her absence. Accordingly, a continuance of the instant status conference will not prejudice Ms. Jackson or the potential requested schedule for the case;
3. Given all the aforementioned, counsel for Ms. Jackson requests that this Court continue the status conference to Wednesday, January 13 2016 at 2:00 PM.
4. The parties jointly request an exclusion of time on the basis of effective preparation of counsel and continuity of counsel; defense counsel further submits that an exclusion of time is in her client's best interest, and that the ends of justice served by excluding the additional period between November 18, 2015 and January 13, 2016 outweigh her client's interest in a speedy trial.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] ORDER
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ORDERED that the status conference in the aforementioned case is hereby continued from November 18, 2015 to January 13, 2016 at 2:00 PM before this Court. Based on the aforementioned representations of defense counsel, this Court further finds that counsel for the defendant needs additional time to effectively prepare a defense for her client, and that defense counsel believes that an exclusion of time is in her client's best interest. Given these circumstances, this Court finds that the ends of justice served by excluding the period between November 18, 2015 and January 13, 2016 outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. An exclusion of time is thus appropriate under the Speedy Trial Act between November 18, 2015 and January 13, 2016 to enable counsel to effectively prepare. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & 18 U.S.C. § 3161(B)(iv).
Source: Leagle
