IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
November 9, 2006
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
EDWARD AARON HARVEY, JR. DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Ronald M. Whyte United States District Judge
ORDER CONTINUING CASE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT, 18 U.S.C. § 3161
This matter came before the Court on Monday, October 30, 2006 for a hearing on the defendant's pretrial motions, and on Monday, November 6, 2006 for a status conference to set a date for an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's motion to suppress his statement. Counsel for the government and the defendant were present at both hearings. Based on the colloquy at the November 6, 2006 hearing, the Court rules as follows:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the case is continued to December 14, 2006 at 1:00 p.m. for an evidentiary hearing on the defendant's motion to suppress his statement.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period of time from October 30, 2006 through and including December 14, 2006 shall be excluded from the period of time within which trial must commence under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq., pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(1)(F) and Section 3161(h)(8)(A), considering the factors set forth  ORDER EXCLUDING TIME U.S. v. HARVEY in Section 3161(h)(8)(B). The Court finds that the time is excludable, and that the ends of justice served by this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial given that this additional time is "delay resulting from any pretrial motion, from the filing of the motion through the conclusion of the hearing on, or other prompt disposition of, such motion." 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F):
For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that the interests of justice in granting this continuance outweigh the defendant's and the public's interests in a speedy trial.
Dated this ____ day of November, 2006.
© 1992-2006 VersusLaw Inc.