UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
August 5, 2008
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
I CHING CHU, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Illston United States District Judge
(PROPOSED) ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM SPEEDY TRIAL ACT COMPUTATION
The parties appeared before the Court on July 25, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. Defendant Mary McNamara appeared on behalf of defendant I Ching Chu. The United States appeared through Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicole M. Kim.
At the hearing, the parties jointly requested that the defendant's guilty plea, previously entered on October 23, 2007, be withdrawn due to fact that the defendant is not eligible for safety valve under U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2. The Court granted the request to withdraw the defendant's plea. In addition, the parties indicated that they are in the process of negotiating the terms of a new plea agreement and that additional time is required for this process to be finalized. Counsel for the defendant requested further settlement proceedings with Magistrate Judge Spero. The Government objected to such settlement conference. The Court directed the parties to continue settlement discussions with Magistrate Judge Spero. Government counsel noted that the above-referenced case is back before the Court on September 22, 2008. In order to finalize plea negotiations, the parties agreed that an extension to September 22, 2008 would be appropriate in the matter.
Based upon the above-described representations and the parties' agreement in open Court, THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT the ends of justice served by granting a continuance from July 25, 2008 through September 22, 2008 outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and that the case is so legally and factually complex, due to the nature of the prosecution (including the volume and range of discovery, the nature of the underlying investigation, and the intertwined nature of this case with two other related cases), and the number of defendants in those cases, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and for the trial within the otherwise applicable time limits set forth in the Speedy Trial Act, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A), and (B)(ii) and (iv).
ACCORDINGLY, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:
1. This case is continued to September 22, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. for change of plea and/or sentencing, and the possible setting of motion and trial dates.
2. The period from July 25, 2008 through September 22, 2008 is excluded from the otherwise applicable Speedy Trial computation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.