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. Gonzalez-Mendivil

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


May 11, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
CARLOS GONZALEZ-MENDIVIL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE

ORDER

The parties appeared before the Court on April 27, 2010, in case number 2:10-CR-00102 LKK. At that time, based upon the representations and agreement of all counsel, the Court ordered a motion briefing schedule to be set as follows: defense motion(s) due by May 18, 2010; government's response due by June 1, 2010, defense replies due by June 8, 2010, and a non-evidentiary hearing to be set for July 7, 2010 at 9:15 a.m.

The Court further found the time from April 24, 2010, through May 18, 2010, and thereafter for pending motions, to be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act.

18 U.S.C. § 3161.

The exclusion of time is appropriate due to the defense counsels' need to prepare. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii) and (iv); Local Code T4. A continuance is necessary in this case in order to ensure defense counsel has a reasonable amount of time to review the evidence given the limitations imposed by Congress. It is also necessary to ensure defense counsels' effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv); Local Code T4.

ACCORDINGLY, it is hereby ordered that a motion briefing schedule be set as follows: defense motion(s) due by May 18, 2010; government's response due by June 1, 2010, defense replies due by June 8, 2010, and a non-evidentiary motion hearing shall be set for July 7, 2010 at 9:15 a.m. Furthermore, the time from April 24, 2010, through May 18, 2010, and thereafter for pending motions, shall be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. The Court finds that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100511

© 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.