IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 17, 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: July 2, 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 change of plea/judgment and sentencing date of June 25, 2010, should be continued until July 2, 2010.
The reason for the continuance is that to allow the [arties sufficient time to negotiate the extent of the defendant's section 5K departure from the applicable guidelines sentence. The parties need additional time to discuss the departure, and the government needs time to write the required "5K letter". To allow the parties time to complete these tasks, they stipulate to continue the present status conference/entry of plea date from June 25, 2010 to July 2, 2010.
Therefore, IT IS STIPULATED between the parties that the time period between the signing of this Order up to and including July 2, 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 and continuity of counsel.
Dated: June 17, 2010 Respectfully submitted, DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender CARO MARKS Attorney for Defendant SHERI LYNN YOKOM
Dated: June 17, 2010 BENJAMIN WAGNER United States Attorney MICHAEL ANDERSON Assistant United States Attorney
UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the June 25, 2010 status conference be continued to July 2, 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 judgment and sentencing on July 2, 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 defense counsel reasonable time to prepare.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.