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. Barba

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


May 5, 2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JO ANN BARBA, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Lawrence J. O'Neill

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING AND ORDER THEREON Date: June 12, 2009 Time: 10:30 a.m.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, MARK J. McKEON, Assistant United States Attorney, and ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for Defendant Jo Ann Barba, that the date for sentencing may be continued to June 12, 2009. The date currently set for sentencing is May 8, 2009, at 10:30 a.m. The requested new date is June 12, 2009, at 10:30 a.m., or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the court.

The parties stipulate that this matter may be continued due to the unavailability of defense counsel on May 8, 2009. It is also requested that this matter be continued to June 12, 2009, to allow for the personal circumstances of Ms. Barba. The defendant is the single parent of a daughter who attends middle school in Bishop, California. Ms. Barba's offense receives substantial publicity in this small community and significant events in the case generally result in front page headlines in the local newspaper. The school term ends on June 4, 2009. Sentencing after that date will avoid the disruption to the to the education of Ms. Barba's daughter that will result if sentencing occurs while school is in session. In the event that Ms. Barba is sentenced to a term of imprisonment, a continuation of the sentencing date will also increase the amount of time available to obtain an alternate residence for Ms. Barba's daughter.

The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded as necessary for continuity of counsel, and for effective defense preparation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). For this reason, the ends of justice served by the granting of the requested continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

DATED: May 4, 2009

ORDER

Good Cause exists for the requested continuance. The intervening period of delay is excluded in the interests of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

20090505

© 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.