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. Redd

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


May 18, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
TRESYLIAN REDD, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Maxine Chesney United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME

Plaintiff, by and through its attorney of record, and defendant, by and through his attorney of record, hereby stipulate and ask the Court to find as follows:

1. For the reasons set forth herein, the parties request that the May 19, 2010 Status hearing be continued until 2:30 p.m. on May 26, 2010, for entry of plea and to allow defendant the opportunity to review the revised plea agreement with defense counsel.

2. The parties believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny defendant continuity of counsel, would deny defendant's counsel and defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and that the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and defendant in a trial within the date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.

3. Thus, the parties respectfully request that the Court find that the time period from May 19, 2010, to May 26, 2010, is excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A), (B)(iv) because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at the defendant's request and on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and because failure to grant the continuance would unreasonably deny defendant continuity of counsel and would unreasonably deny defense counsel the time necessary for effective preparation for trial, taking into account due diligence.

SO STIPULATED.

[PROPOSED] ORDER FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, THE COURT ADOPTS THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW STIPULATED TO BY THE PARTIES. THEREFORE, IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED THAT:

1. The currently scheduled May 19, 2010, hearing is vacated. A hearing for entry of plea is now scheduled for 2:30 p.m. on May 26, 2010.

2. The time period from May 19, 2010 to May 26, 2010, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A), (B)(iv) because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at the defendant's request and on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and because failure to grant the continuance would unreasonably deny defense counsel the time necessary for effective preparation for trial, taking into account due diligence.

The Court finds that nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which trial must commence.

20100518

© 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.