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. Madrigal-Madrigal

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


September 2, 2010

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
VICENTE MADRIGAL-MADRIGAL , DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE Date: September 10, 2010 Time: 9:00a.m. Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED between the parties, Michele Beckwith, Assistant United States Attorney, and Douglas J. Beevers, Assistant Federal Defender, attorney for defendant VICENTE MADRIGAL-MADRIGAL, that the status conference of September 3, 2010 at 9:00 a.m., be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on September 10, 2010 at 9:00 a.m.

The reason for the continuance is because the defendant recently had surgery on his head and he is taking pain medications which interferes with his concentration, and he will not be ready to plead guilty until next week. His condition has improved substantially since last week. 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 signing of this Order, up to and including September 10, 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, for ongoing preparation of counsel.

ORDER

UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the status conference presently set for September 3, 2010, be continued to September 10, 2010 at 9:00 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 September 10, 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.

20100902

© 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.