IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
December 11, 2009
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
CARLOS ALBARRAN-MONTES, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. William B. Shubb
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER
Date: January 25, 2010
Time: 8:30 a.m.
It is hereby stipulated between the parties, Assistant United States Attorney Michael Anderson, and Assistant Federal Defender Caro Marks, attorney for defendant Carlos Albarran-Montes, as follows:
The status conference hearing date of December 14, 2009, should be continued until January 25, 2010.
The reason for the continuance is that close scrutiny of the Alien Plea-Pre Presentence Report [PPPSR] reveals a complicated procedural criminal history with regard to at least two of the defendant's prior convictions. In particular, several convictions and probation violations that are scored separately may in fact have been consolidated for sentencing. If they were it is possible the defendant might be a different criminal history category than that calculated in the PPPSR. The defendant has requested counsel to examine the court documents in the possession of United States Probation to aid her in determining the defendants' criminal history category. Due to the upcoming holidays and travel schedules, it would be impracticable to complete this task before January, 2010.
Therefore, IT IS STIPULATED between the parties that the time period between the signing of this Order up to and including January 25, 2010 be excluded in computing the time within which trial must commence under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T4, for ongoing preparation of counsel.
Dated: December 11, 2009
DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender
CARO MARKS Attorney for Defendant CARLOS ALBARRAN-MONTES
Dated: December 11, 2009
BENJAMIN WAGNER United States Attorney
MICHAEL ANDERSON Assistant United States Attorney
UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the December 14, 2009 status conference be continued to January 25, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing there from, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. It is ordered that time up to and including the status conference on January 25, 2010 shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel reasonable time to prepare.
© 1992-2009 VersusLaw Inc.