[PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

EDWARD M. CHEN, District Judge.

On February 5, 2020, the parties appeared before this Court for a status conference. At that time, defense counsel requested a continuance until February 19, 2020, so that a private defense attorney who has been retained by the defendant's family could take over the matter. The matter was scheduled for a change of plea on February 19, 2020.

With the agreement of the parties as explained on the record during the hearing, the Court enters this order documenting the exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act from February 5, 2020 to February 19, 2020 (inclusive), pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). The parties agreed to the exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for continuity of counsel. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), (B)(iv). The parties agree that the ends of justice are served by granting the continuance and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based on the reasons stated on the record and in the stipulation of the parties above, the Court hereby FINDS that the exclusion of time from February 5, 2020 to February 19, 2020 (inclusive) 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 defendant effective preparation of counsel. 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).