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. Santiago

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


February 2, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOSE ANTONIO SANTIAGO, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: William B. Shubb

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

Date: February 16, 2010

Time: 8:30 a.m.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties, Michael Anderson, Assistant United States Attorney, and Douglas J. Beevers, Assistant Federal Defender, attorney for defendant Jose Antonio Santiago, that the status conference of February 1, 2010, be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on February 16, 2010, at 8:30 a.m.

The reason for this continuance is because defense counsel was not able to visit Mr. Santiago at the jail due to the ongoing trial before this Court in the matter of United States v. Elden Ray Cibart.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED and agreed between the parties that the period from the signing of this Order, up to and including February 16, 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, for ongoing preparation of counsel.

Dated: January 29, 2010 Respectfully submitted, DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender DOUGLAS BEEVERS Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant JOSE ANTONIO SANTIAGO

Dated: January 29, 2010 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney MICHAEL ANDERSON Assistant U.S. Attorney

ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the status conference presently set for February 1, 2010, be continued to Monday, February 16, 2010, at 8:30 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defendant 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 from the date of this Order, to and including, the February 16, 2010, status conference 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel time to prepare.

20100202

© 1992-2010 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.