UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
May 11, 2010
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
MARK ESTES PETERSON, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Laurel Beeler
[PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME PURSUANT TO THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
Date: May 6, 2010
Defendant Mark Estes Peterson appeared at a status conference before the Court on May 6, 2010. With the agreement of the parties, and with the consent of the defendant, the Court enters this order documenting the exclusion of time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B), from May 6, 2010 to May 27, 2010. The parties agreed, and the Court found and held, as follows:
1. Defendant sought and agreed to the exclusion of time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act so that defense counsel would have time to investigate and prepare for the trial of this matter, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
2. Given these circumstances, the Court found that the ends of justice served by excluding the period from May 6, 2010 to May 27, 2010, from Speedy Trial Act calculations outweighs the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial by allowing for the defense to prepare effectively, in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B).
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
With the consent of defendant Mark Estes Peterson, the period from May 6, 2010 to May 27, 2010, is excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculations for continuity of and effective preparation of counsel and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED
LAUREL BEELER United States Magistrate Judge
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.