UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA OAKLAND DIVISION
January 11, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
FEI QIANG QIN,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: The Hon. Donna M. Ryu United States Magistrate Judge
MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612) United States Attorney MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630) Criminal Chief HANLEY CHEW (CABN 189985) Assistant United States Attorney 1301 Clay Street, Suite 340S Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 637-3680 Fax: (510) 637-3724 E-Mail: email@example.com Attorneys for Plaintiff
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING THE PRELIMINARY HEARING DATE, AND EXCLUDING TIME, FROM JANUARY 20, 2011 TO FEBRUARY 4, 2011
On August 31, 2010, defendant Fei Qiang Qin ("defendant") was charged in a criminal complaint. On that same day, defendant was arraigned on the complaint and entered a plea of not guilty. Defendant was also released on a $100,000 signature bond. Defendant is a resident of Oakland and the purported criminal activity underlying the criminal complaint occurred in Oakland. The preliminary hearing in this matter is currently scheduled for December 15, 2010.
By this stipulation, the parties respectfully request, and defendant specifically consents, that the preliminary hearing in this case be continued from January 20, 2011 to February 24, 2011, and, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1(d), the time limits set forth in Rule 5.1(c) be excluded from January 20, 2011 to February 24, 2011. The parties respectfully Stipulation and Proposed Order Case No. 10-mj-70762 DMR request that this Court extend the time for a preliminary hearing, taking into account the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. Fed. R. Crim. P. 5.1(d). The parties agree that -- taking into account the public interest in prompt disposition of criminal cases -- good cause exists for this extension. Defense counsel needs additional time to review the evidence produced and collected by the government and conduct her own investigation into the facts of this case.
After defense counsel has reviewed the evidence and completed her investigation, the parties intend to discuss whether a pre-indictment disposition is possible. The parties also agree that granting the continuance is necessary for effective preparation of defense counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). The parties also agreed that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweighs the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). Moreover, government counsel is scheduled to begin a two week trial beginning on February 7, 2011.
IT IS SO STIPULATED:
For the reasons stated above, the Court finds that good cause exists to continue the 9:30 preliminary hearing in this case from January 20, 2011 to February 24, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. and to have the matter heard before the Honorable Laurel Beeler. The Court also finds that an exclusion of time from January 20, 2011 to February 24, 2011 is warranted and that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and prompt disposition of criminal cases. See 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(8)(A); Fed. R. Crim. P. 5.1(d). Failure to grant the requested continuances would deny defendant reasonable Stipulation and Proposed Order Case No. 10-mj-70762 DMR time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.