The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edmund F. Brennan U.S. Magistrate Judge
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION AND EXCLUDING TIME
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney Jill M. Thomas, counsel for the plaintiff, and defendant Jonathan Nimis, by and through his counsel C. Emmett Mahle, that good cause exists to extend the preliminary examination currently set for December 4, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. to December 21, 2009, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(d).
Good cause exists to extend the time for the preliminary examination within meaning of Rule 5.1(d) because discovery has been provided and the parties are close to a pre-indictment resolution of the case against the defendant. The defendant agrees that a continuance of the preliminary hearing date will not prejudice him because a pre-indictment resolution could result in an overall sentencing exposure that is significantly reduced. Both counsel believe a resolution on this case may occur within the next few weeks.
Counsel further stipulate that an exclusion of time from December 4, 2009, to December 21, 2009, is appropriate under the Speedy Trial Act because the government has provided discovery, and the government will need time to finalize a plea agreement for defense counsel to review the draft agreement and discuss its implications with the defendant. As a result, counsel for both parties believe time should be excluded under Local Code T4 to allow reasonable time to prepare defense of the case. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A); Local Code T4. DATED: 12/2/09 _____ /s/ C. Emmett Mahle
C. EMMETT MAHLE Attorney for Defendant
JILL M. THOMAS Assistant U.S. Attorney
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, and by stipulation of all counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:
1. The Court finds good cause to extend the Preliminary Examination currently set for December 4, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. to December 21, 2009, at 2:00 p.m. pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(d);
2. Based upon the above representations and stipulation of the parties, the Court further finds that the ends of justice outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Accordingly, time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded ...