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. Diaz

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


June 7, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
MARIO DIAZ, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER RESETTING BRIEFING SCHEDULE

Plaintiff, United States of America, by its counsel, Assistant United States Attorneys Jason Hitt and William S. Wong, and defendant Edward FUENTES, by his counsel John Balazs, Esq., on behalf of the entire defense group that joined in the subject motions, stipulate and agree that the briefing schedule on the defense motions to dismiss the indictment and motion to suppress the wiretaps and should be reset as follows:

Govt. Opposition Brief Due (wiretap only): June 11, 2010 Defense Reply Briefs Due: July 2, 2010 The government will file its opposition to the defense motion to dismiss on June 4, 2010, as originally scheduled. However, the government has requested additional time to respond to the defense motion to suppress the wiretaps because the government did not anticipate having to respond to two motions and the defense motion to suppress the wiretaps is approximately 68 pages and includes numerous voluminous exhibits. The parties agree that the government may have an additional week to file its opposition to the wiretap suppression motion. The defense, in turn, will file its reply briefs to the government's oppositions on each motion on July 2, 2010. If the Court agrees, the parties do not seek to alter the hearing date for the motions on July 19, 2010, unless the Court requires additional time to review the pleadings on each motion. The Court has previously ordered time excluded as to all defendants up to and including the hearing date of July 19, 2010 for complexity of the case under Local Code T2 (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii)) and so that counsel for the defense may have reasonable time necessary to continue their effective preparation and defense of this case, taking into account the exercise of due diligence under Local Code T4 (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)). In addition, time should be excluded based upon the filing and pendency of pretrial motions under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D). The parties believe that such exclusions are appropriate and ask the Court make such findings.

ORDER

Based upon the representations and stipulation of counsel, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The Court adopts the revised briefing schedule set forth in the stipulation of the parties; and

2. Time shall be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act as to all defendants up to and including the hearing date of July 19, 2010 based upon the complexity of the case under Local Code T2 and so that counsel for the defense may have reasonable time necessary to continue their effective preparation and defense of this case, taking into account the exercise of due diligence under Local Code T4. In addition, time is excluded based upon the filing and pendency of pretrial motions under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100607

© 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.