Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Wren, 2:16-mj-00562-NJK. (2017)

Court: District Court, D. Nevada Number: infdco20170906720 Visitors: 30
Filed: Aug. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Aug. 07, 2017
Summary: Stipulation to Continue the Preliminary Hearing NANCY J. KOPPE , Magistrate Judge . IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between DANIEL G. BOGDEN, United States Attorney, and ELHAM ROOHANI, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for the United States of America, and REBECCA LEVY, counsel for Defendant RANDY LEE WREN, that the preliminary hearing date in the above-captioned matter, currently scheduled for August 7, 2017, at 4:00 pm, be vacated to a date and time convenient to this H
More

Stipulation to Continue the Preliminary Hearing

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between DANIEL G. BOGDEN, United States Attorney, and ELHAM ROOHANI, Assistant United States Attorney, counsel for the United States of America, and REBECCA LEVY, counsel for Defendant RANDY LEE WREN, that the preliminary hearing date in the above-captioned matter, currently scheduled for August 7, 2017, at 4:00 pm, be vacated to a date and time convenient to this Honorable Court but in any event no sooner than 60 days.

This stipulation is entered into for the following reasons:

1. The parties have resolved the case pre-indictment, and are awaiting assignment of a district judge and a change of plea date. Additional time is needed to accommodate court scheduling. 2. The parties agree to the continuance. 3. Defendant is incarcerated, but does not object to the continuance. 4. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice. 5. The additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay, but to allow for a potential pre-indictment resolution of the case. 6. The additional time requested by this stipulation, is allowed, with the defendant's consent under the Federal Rules of Procedure 5.1(d).

ORDER

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

1. The parties have resolved the case pre-indictment, and are awaiting assignment of a district judge and a change of plea date. Additional time is needed to accommodate court scheduling. 2. The parties agree to the continuance. 3. Defendant is incarcerated, but does not object to the continuance. 4. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice. 5. The additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay, but to allow for a potential pre-indictment resolution of the case. 6. The additional time requested by this stipulation, is allowed, with the defendant's consent under the Federal Rules of Procedure 5.1(d).

For all of the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the preliminary hearing date.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The ends of justice served by granting said continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendants, since the failure to grant said continuance would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice, would deny the parties herein to potentially resolve the case prior to indictment, and further would deny the parties sufficient time and the opportunity within which to be able to effectively and thoroughly prepare for the preliminary hearing, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

The continuance sought herein is allowed, with the defendants' consent, pursuant to Federal Rules of Procedure 5.1(d).

ORDER

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the preliminary hearing currently scheduled for August 7, 2017, at the hour of 4:00 pm, be vacated and continued to October 11, 2017, at 4:00 p.m., in courtroom 3C.

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