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. Santiago

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


August 18, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JASON RAUL SANTIAGO, DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: William B. Shubb

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE Date: August 30, 2010 Time: 8:30 a.m.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties, William Wong, Assistant United States Attorney, and Douglas J. Beevers, Assistant Federal Defender, attorney for defendant JASON RAUL SANTIAGO, that the status conference of August 23, 2010 at 8:30 a.m., be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on August 30, 2010 at 8:30 a.m.

The reason for the continuance is to allow the parties additional time to negotiate a resolution. In addition, defense counsel is on leave August 16th through August 20th and will not have enough time to confer with the defendant before the currently scheduled status conference. The parties agree a continuance is necessary for this purpose, and agree to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act accordingly.

IT IS STIPULATED that the period from the date of the parties' stipulation, August 18, 2010, and up to and including August 30, 2010, shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C §3161(h)(7)(A) and (B) (ii) and (iv) and Local Code T4 (ongoing preparation of defense counsel).

ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the status conference presently set for August 23, 2010, be continued to August 30, 2010 at 8:30 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defendant 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 from the date of this Order, to and including, the August 30, 2010 status conference 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel time to prepare.

20100818

© 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.