Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

U.S. v. BOGARIN, 2:15-cr-00313-APG-VCF-2. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170215f02 Visitors: 16
Filed: Feb. 14, 2017
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2017
Summary: STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE SENTENCING ANDREW P. GORDON , District Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney, Brandon C. Jaroch, Assistant United States Attorney; Lance J. Hendron, Esq., of the law firm GUYMON & HENDRON, PLLC, attorney for Defendant, Emilio Bogarin, Jr., that the sentencing in the above-captioned matter set for be reset for ninety (90 This Stipulation is entered for the following reasons 1. Additional time is
More

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE SENTENCING

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Daniel G. Bogden, United States Attorney, Brandon C. Jaroch, Assistant United States Attorney; Lance J. Hendron, Esq., of the law firm GUYMON & HENDRON, PLLC, attorney for Defendant, Emilio Bogarin, Jr., that the sentencing in the above-captioned matter set for be reset for ninety (90

This Stipulation is entered for the following reasons

1. Additional time is required to be adequately prepared for Mr. Bogarin's sentencing.

2. Mr. Bogarin agrees with this continuance.

3. This is the Second Request by Mr. Bogarin for a Continuance of his Sentencing.

4. A denial of this request for a continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice.

5. Mr. Hendron has spoken to AUSA Emilio Bogarin and he has no objection to this continuance request.

FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSION OF LAW AND ORDER

Based upon the pending Stipulation of counsel, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court hereby finds that:

This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons:

1. Additional time is required to be adequately prepared for Mr. Bogarin's sentencing. 2. Mr. Bogarin agrees with this continuance. 3. This is the Second Request by Mr. Bogarin for a Continuance of his Sentencing 4. A denial of this request for a continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice. 5. Mr. Hendron has spoken to AUSA Brandon C. Jaroch and he has no objection to this continuance request.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The granting of said continuance comes with good cause, since the failure to grant said continuance would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice, would deny the parties herein sufficient time and the opportunity within which to be able to effectively and thoroughly prepare for sentencing, and taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

ORDER

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the sentencing in this matter scheduled for February 16, 2017, at the hour of 10:00 a.m., is hereby vacated and continued to the 18th day of May, 2017, at the hour of 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 6C.

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