IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 26, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
CHRISTOPHER SANDERS, II, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Honorable John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE
REASONS FOR REQUEST
The parties are just finishing up a plea agreement. The defense desires additional time to review the proposed plea agreement, make any necessary revisions to the plea agreement, obtain and review a revised pre-plea report from Probation, and counsel for the defense needs extra time to travel to Butte County Jail in Oroville to review the same with Mr. Sanders. The following stipulation is for the purpose of allowing sufficient time for defense counsel to conduct a conference with the client and explain to Mr. Sanders the documentation described herein.
It is hereby stipulated by and between the parties through their respective counsel that the status conference in the above-entitled case presently set for Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. be continued without appearance, for the reasons set forth above, two weeks to Tuesday, July 14, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. The parties further stipulate that time included in this continuance be excluded pursuant to Speedy Trial Act, from June 25, 2009, through July 14, 2009, for defense preparation for reasons described in this stipulation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4.
Dated: June 25, 2009 Mr. Samuel Wong, Esq. (by RMH) Assistant United States Attorney Counsel the United States
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING and upon the stipulation of the parties, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference in the above-entitled case, presently scheduled for Tuesday, June 30, 2009 at 9:30 a.m., be continued without appearance to Tuesday, July 14, 2009 at 9:30 a.m.
Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that: the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. It is further ordered that time from June 25, 2009, up to and including July 14, 2009, be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act exclusion sections set forth in the stipulation above.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.