Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Vasquez-Gonzalez, CR 4:18-0056. (2018)

Court: District Court, N.D. California Number: infdco20181023f71 Visitors: 12
Filed: Oct. 22, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 22, 2018
Summary: STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING AND EXCLUDE TIME, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER JON S. TIGAR , District Judge . The parties are presently set to appear before this court for a status conference on Friday, October 26, 2018, at 9:30am. As explained below, the parties stipulate and agree that this status conference should be continued. Numerous reasons support a continuance. First, counsel for defendant Vasquez-Gonzalez has been in trial before the Honorable Judge White since October 10, 2018, in Un
More

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE HEARING AND EXCLUDE TIME, AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

The parties are presently set to appear before this court for a status conference on Friday, October 26, 2018, at 9:30am. As explained below, the parties stipulate and agree that this status conference should be continued. Numerous reasons support a continuance. First, counsel for defendant Vasquez-Gonzalez has been in trial before the Honorable Judge White since October 10, 2018, in United States v. David Telles, No. CR 16-0424 JSW. The obligations of trial and the necessary preparations have limited counsel's opportunity to review discovery, consult with his client, and consider possible resolutions to this matter. Second, counsel for defendant Rubalcaba is similarly likely to begin trial before Judge Chhabria within the next two weeks (the specific date has not yet been yet) in United States v. Kermit Tanner, No. CR 17-0347 VC. In addition, counsel for defendant Rubalcaba is currently investigating issues relevant to his client's competency and the appropriate guidelines calculation for any potential resolution, which may be affected by the outcome of that investigation. Those investigations are ongoing. Third, counsel for defendant Vazquez has been in discussions with government counsel regarding the terms of a potential resolution, but the parties have not yet reached an agreement to present to the court. The parties require additional time to continue negotiations.

For the reasons discussed above, the parties propose that the matter be continued 56 days to Friday, December 21, 2018, at 9:30am. The parties further stipulate to exclude time for purposes of the Speedy Trial Act between October 26, 2018, and December 21, 2018. The parties agree that an exclusion of time is appropriate under the Speedy Trial Act for continuity of counsel and for the effective preparation of counsel. The parties also agree that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the parties' stipulation, the Court orders that the hearing currently set for October 26, 2018 be continued to 9:30am on December 21, 2018. The Court further finds that the exclusion of time from October 26, 2018 through and including December 21, 2018 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. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny the defendant effective preparation of counsel, would interrupt the continuity of counsel, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(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