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. Pesce

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


March 16, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
DANIEL A. PESCE, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Marilyn H. Patel United States District Court Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT FROM JANUARY 25, 2010 TO MARCH 8, 2010

On January 25, 2010, the parties in this case appeared before the Honorable Marilyn H. Patel for a status appearance. At that time, the parties stipulated that time should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculation from January 25, 2010 to March 8, 2010 for effective preparation of defense counsel. The parties represented that granting the continuance was for the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of defense counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

The parties also agreed that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweighed the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO United States Attorney

DATED: 01/25/2010

ACADIA SENESE Special Assistant United States Attorney

DATED: 03/08/2010

ELIZABETH FALK Attorney for Daniel A. Pesce

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that time is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from January 25, 2010 to March 8, 2010, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100316

© 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.