Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

USA v. Hatch, CR 17-0301 JST. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20180201a94 Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 30, 2018
Latest Update: Jan. 30, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING MATTER AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . STIPULATION The parties appeared before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar on January 26, 2018. Counsel for the government requested a trial date, and defense counsel requested a date for potential change of plea. Defense counsel is still reviewing materials from the government, and needs additional time to discuss the case with Mr. Dovala. The parties requested, and the Court gran
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING MATTER AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

STIPULATION

The parties appeared before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar on January 26, 2018. Counsel for the government requested a trial date, and defense counsel requested a date for potential change of plea. Defense counsel is still reviewing materials from the government, and needs additional time to discuss the case with Mr. Dovala. The parties requested, and the Court granted, a continuance until February 23, 2018. The parties also stipulated, and the Court ordered, that time between January 26, 2018 and February 23, 2018, be excluded for effective preparation of counsel pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

The parties further stipulate, and ask the Court to find, that the requested continuance and exclusion of time are in the interests of justice and outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

SO STIPULATED.

Attestation of Filer

In addition to myself, the other signatory to this document is Adam Pennella. I attest that I have his permission to enter a conformed signature on his behalf and to file the document.

ORDER

For the reasons stated, this matter is continued until February 23, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. The time between January 26, 2018, and February 23, 2018, is excluded from the running of the speedy trial clock for effective preparation of counsel under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Failure to grant the continuance would deny the defendant's counsel the reasonable time necessary to prepare, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

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