IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 6, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
SHERI LYNN YOKOM, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]ORDER Date: May 7, 2010 Time: 9:00 am. Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell
It is hereby stipulated between the parties, Assistant United States Attorney Michael Anderson, and Assistant Federal Defender Caro Marks, attorney for defendant Sheri Lynn Yokom, as follows:
The status conference hearing date of April 23, 2010, should be continued until May 7, 2010 .
The reason for the continuance is as follows: the defense has requested that the government include a provision in the plea agreement that would state the government does not object to the defendant serving her prison time in Canada, her country of origin. The prosecutor is presently in trial and has not had time to make the requested addition. Also, the defendant has recently found an error in her PSR, which will require defense counsel to travel to Nevada County Jail and meet with her and then to research it.
To allow both counsel to achieve these goals, the parties stipulate to continue the present status conference/entry of plea date from April 23, 2010, to May 7, 2010.
Therefore, IT IS STIPULATED between the parties that the time period between the signing of this Order up to and including May 7, 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.
UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that The April 23, 2010 status conference be continued to May 7, 2010 at 9:00 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 May 7, 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 counsel reasonable time to prepare.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.