Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Morris

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


February 3, 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
WICKETT MORRIS, DEFENDANT.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A))

With the agreement of the parties, and with the consent of defendant Wickett Morris, the Court enters this order documenting defendant's exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1), from February 2, 2009, until February 23, 2009. The parties agree, and the Court finds and holds, as follows:

1. Defendant has reported a rupture in his communications with his appointed counsel, Kenneth Wine, and is in the process of attempting to retain alternative counsel. The Court determined that it would be appropriate to give defendant until February 23 to attempt to retain an alternative lawyer. Since the Speedy Trial Act clock was scheduled to reach 70 days on February 18, the Court determined that it was necessary and appropriate to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act until the next calling of the case on February 23. The parties agree that this exclusion is warranted in light of defendant's counsel situation, since failing to grant the requested exclusion would unreasonably deny defendant continuity of counsel by making it impossible for Mr. Wine and defendant to attempt to work out their differences, due to the press of an imminent trial; since failing to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny defendant's counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, because any new counsel Mr. Morris would retain could not be prepared for trial by February 18; and since it would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice if Mr. Morris were forced to undergo trial by February 18, given the unsettled situation with his representation.

2. Given these circumstances, the Court found that the ends of justice served by excluding the period from February 2, 2009, until February 23, 2009, outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Id. at § 3161(h)(8)(A).

3. Accordingly, and with the consent of the defendant, at the hearing on February 2, 13 2009, the Court ordered that the period from February 2, 2009, until February 23, 2009, be excluded from Speedy Trial Act calculations under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A), (B)(i), and (B)(iv).

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

20090203

© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.