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 19, 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; EXCLUDING TIME

Date: February 16, 2010

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 SANTIGAO, that the status conference of February 16, 2010 be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on February 22, 2010 at 8:30 a.m.

As defense counsel has recently been involved in trial in the matter of United States v. Elden Cibart, a continuance is requested to allow additional time to prepare, to review discovery and discuss options with Mr. Santiago, and to conduct further investigation of his case.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED and agreed between the parties that the period from the signing of this Order, up to and including February 22, 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: February 12, 2010

Respectfully submitted,

DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender

DOUGLAS BEEVERS Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant JOSE ANTONIO SANTIAGO

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 16, 2010 be continued to Monday, February 22, 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 February 22, 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel time to prepare.

20100219

© 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.