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. Carr

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


March 31, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ROBERT CARR, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge Hon. Garland E. Burrell

STIPULATION AND (PROPOSED) ORDER

Date: April 2, 2010

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties, Samuel Wong, Assistant United States Attorney, for plaintiff United States of America, on the one hand, and Douglas Beevers, Assistant Federal Defender, attorney for defendant Theresa Ann Carr, and C. Emmett Mahle, attorney for defendant Robert Carr, on the other hand, that the status conference of April 2, 2010, at 9:00 a.m., be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on June 4, 2010, at 9:00 a.m.

The reason for the continuance is that counsel is expecting to receive a plea agreement and we are continuing ongoing plea negotiations. Also, defense counsel need additional time to discuss with their respective clients of the state of the evidence which is voluminous and comprises over 30 boxes of documents, the ramifications of any plea offer, and the risks of proceeding with the litigation. Based on these facts, the parties stipulate and agree that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and trial itself within the time limits established in 18 U.S.C. § 3161, the case is unusual or complex within the meaning of the Speedy Trial Act, and the requested continuance is necessary to provide defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

IT IS STIPULATED that the period from the date of the parties' stipulation, March 31, 2010, and up to and including June 4, 2010, shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C §3161(h(7)(A) and (B) (ii) and (iv) and Local Codes T2 (unusual and complex case) and T4 (ongoing preparation of defense counsel).

DATED: 03/31/2010

C. EMMETT MAHLE Attorney for Defendant ROBERT CARR

DOUGLAS BEEVERS Attorney for Defendant THERESA ANN CARR

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney

SAMUEL WONG Assistant U.S. Attorney

(PROPOSED) ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the status conference presently set for April 2, 2010, be continued to June 4, 2010, at 9:00 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and trial itself within the time limits established in 18 U.S.C. § 3161, the case is unusual or complex within the meaning of the Speedy Trial Act, and the requested continuance is necessary to provide defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds 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 the parties' stipulation, March 31, 2010, up to and including, the June 4, 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)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv) and Local Codes T2 (unusual and complex case) and T4 (allow defense counsel reasonable time to prepare).

20100331

© 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.