The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Susan Illston United States District Court Judge
[PROPOSED] STIPULATED ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE Current Hearing Date: March 27, 2009 Time: 11:00 a.m. Judge: Hon. Susan Illston Proposed Hearing Date: May 8, 2009 Time: 11:00 a.m.
The above-captioned case is currently scheduled for a status conference on Friday, March 27, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. Counsel for the parties are currently engaged in negotiations regarding a possible resolution of this case, and those negotiations require additional investigation of facts by both sides. Accordingly, the parties desire additional time to investigate the relevant facts and attempt to reach a resolution.
In addition, both counsel for the government and counsel for the defendant are set for trials in other matters during the month of April.
Therefore, the parties jointly request that the date for the status conference in this case be continued one month to Friday, May 8, 2009 at 11:00 a.m.
Further, the parties stipulate and jointly request that time be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculations from March 27, 2009 through May 8, 2009 for effective preparation and continuity of counsel. The exclusion of time is necessary both because of the further investigation described above and because of the intervening trials of counsel. The parties agree that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweighed the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).
SPEEDY TRIAL ACT IMPLICATIONS
Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161, and Crim. Loc. Rule 47-2(c), there are seventy (70) days remaining before the trial in this case must commence. Taking the stipulated time exclusion from March 27, 2009 through May 8, 2009 into account, the "speedy trial" date for this matter is July 17, 2009.
For good cause shown, the status conference now scheduled for Friday, March 27, 2009 is vacated. The matter shall be added to the Court's calendar on Friday, May 8, 2009 at 11:00 a.m. for status and possible change of plea.
In addition, for the reasons stated above, the Court finds that an exclusion of time from March 27, 2009 through May 8, 2009 is warranted and that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(8)(A). The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny defense counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. See 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).
Taking the exclusion of time from March 27, 2009 through May 8, 2009 into account, the "speedy trial" date for this matter is July 17, 2009.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw ...