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 of America v. Matthew Mistachkin

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


March 8, 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
MATTHEW MISTACHKIN,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Honorable Maxine M.CHESNEY United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND PROPOSED ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3161 AND CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE

On February 16, 2011 the parties appeared before the Court for status. The parties 23 requested a continuance for a possible change of plea on March 9, 2011. The parties also requested, and the Court ordered that time be excluded from the running of the speedy trial clock between February 16 and March 9, 2011 for effective preparation of counsel, §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

As of the date of this filing, the parties are in further negotiation and request that the matter be 27 continued from March 9 to March 30, 2011 for a change of plea. The parties request that the time between March 9 and March 30, 2011 be excluded under the speedy trial act, 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), to afford adequate preparation of counsel. The parties agree that, taking into 3 account the public interest in prompt disposition of criminal cases, good cause exists for this 4 extension.

The parties also agree that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance utweighed the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

SO STIPULATED:

MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney DATED: March 7, 2011 BENJAMIN P. TOLKOFF Assistant United States Attorney DATED: March 7, 2011 LOREN STEWART Attorney for MATTHEW MISTACHKIN

For the reasons stated above, the Court orders that this matter be continued from March 18 to March 30, 2011 and finds that the exclusion of time March 9 to March 30, 2011 is warranted 19 and that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public 20 and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A). The failure to grant the 21 requested continuance would deny the defendant effective preparation of counsel, and would 22 result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

SO ORDERED.

20110308

© 1992-2011 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.