UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 7, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
AKBAR BHAMANI, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Morrisonc. England, JR United States District Judge
EdwardW. Swanson, SBN 159859 Britt Evangelist, SBN 260457 SWANSON & McNAMARA LLP 300 Montgomery Street, Suite 1100 San Francisco, California 94104 Telephone: (415) 477-3800 Facsimile: (415) 477-9010 Attorneys for AKBAR BHAMANI
STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME
Date: June 9, 2011
Time: 9:00 am Crt Rm.: 7 (MCE)
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by defendants AKBAR BHAMANI, through his counsel, Edward W. Swanson; ZAIN BHAMANI, through his counsel, Matthew G. Jacobs; KEN SARNA, through his counsel, Joseph A. Welch; ALY BHAMANI, through his counsel, Christopher H. Wing; FEROZA BHAMANI, through her counsel, Matthew C. Bockmon; LAILA BHAMAI, through her counsel Clyde M. Blackmon; JOHN PIERRE QUINTANA, through his counsel, Richard Pachter; and SHAUN BHAMANI, through his counsel, Patrick K. Hanly; and by the United States of America, through its counsel, Assistant U.S. Attorney R. Steven Lapham, that the status conference now scheduled for June 9, 2011 at 9:00 a.m., be continued to July 28, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
The defendants were charged by indictment on August 12, 2010, with multiple counts related to mail fraud, wire fraud and money laundering allegedly occurring over an approximately two and half year period and involving the operation of a real estate investment and development company. On September 13, 2010 counsel for all defendants received approximately 20,000 pages of discovery. Since that time, defense counsel have completed an initial review of the discovery materials and are engaged in an ongoing analysis of the factual and legal issues implicated therein.
The factual circumstances in this case are complex, involve multiple real property and investment transactions, include allegations concerning multiple defendants and will require extensive defense investigative efforts, which are currently ongoing. In particular, the defense preparation at this time includes an analysis of relevant financial records and transactions. The defense has substantially completed its review of these records and transactions, and has engaged the services of an expert to assist with the analysis. Despite the diligent efforts of defense counsel and its expert, the work is not yet complete. The defense anticipates that, prior to July 28, 2011 they will have sufficient results from the financial analysis to engage in discussions with the government about settlement or about the setting of motions and trial dates.
Due to these considerations, the parties agree and hereby stipulate that the status conference currently scheduled on June 9, 2011 be continued to 9:00 a.m. on July 28, 2011, and that the parties appear on July 28, 2011 for the setting of further dates in this matter. The parties further agree and stipulate that the public interest in a speedy trial is outweighed by the interests of justice, given defense counsel's need for further preparation and due to the complexity of the matter. Therefore, the parties stipulate pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii)and(iv) [Local Code T2, T4] that time shall be excluded from June 9, 2011, to July 28, 2011.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
This matter having come before me pursuant to the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS ORDERED THAT: the status conference hearing now set for June 9, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. is vacated and the matter is set for a status conference hearing on July 28, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
Further, the Court finds that time is excluded based upon the representation of the parties that the interests of justice outweigh the public interest in a speedy trial, given the need for further defense preparation and the complex nature of the matter. Therefore, such time will be excluded pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii)and(iv) [Local Code T2, T4], from June 9, 2011 until the next appearance on July 28, 2011.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.