IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
May 18, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrison C. England, Jr. United States District Judge
ORDER CONTINUING STATUS
CONFERENCE/ENTRY OF PLEA
REASONS FOR REQUEST
This matter is currently scheduled for a status conference on August 25, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. Counsel for the defense needs additional time in connection with a myriad of guideline considerations requiring both legal research as well as an in depth review of an extremely large amount of discovery received in connection with those issues. The parties have met and conferred and appear to be close to a settlement but the defense needs further time to evaluate some rather complex legal questions. The government as graciously agreed to stipulate to the additional needed time. Both parties are anticipating an amicable settlement without the necessity of taking this matter to jury trial.
The defense can assure the Court that this will be the last request for a continuance in this matter and that the next appearance will be for either entry of plea on a negotiated settlement or the setting of trial.
For the reasons set forth above, it is hereby stipulated by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel that the date presently scheduled for the next appearance in this case be continued from Thursday, August 25, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. to Thursday, September 29, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. for entry of plea or trial setting.
The parties further stipulate that all time included in this request for continuance is necessary to provide defense counsel reasonable time to prepare his client's defense taking into account due diligence. The parties further stipulate and agree that the ends of justice that will be served by granting of this requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial. The parties further stipulate that all time included in this request be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), and Local Code T4, due to the need to provide defense counsel with the reasonable time to prepare.
Mr. Todd A. Pickles (by RMH) Assistant United States Attorney Counsel the United States MR. ROBERT M. HOLLEY, Esq. Counsel for Mr. Garcia
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, the above calendaring change with respect to the defendant's scheduled status conference/entry of plea, with the stipulated provisions for exclusion of time under the Federal Speedy Trial Act IS SO ORDERED. The Court finds the ends of justice outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: August 24, 2011
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.