IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
July 6, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
JOHN SIBERT, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Edmund F. Brennan
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO CONTINUE ARRAIGNMENT TO SEPTEMBER 26, 2011
Date: July 18, 2011 Time: 10:00 a.m.
John Sibert, by and through his counsel, Daniel J. Broderick, Federal Defender and Courtney Fein, Assistant Federal Defender, hereby moves this Court for an order to vacate the currently-scheduled date for arraignment, July 18, 2011, and reschedule the arraignment for September 26, 2011. Counsel has not been able to reach the government's attorney regarding this request and is thus not aware of the government's position.
Mr. Sibert works at Aleknagik Lodge in Aleknagik, Alaska, a remote area of the state for the summer. It would be difficult and prohibitively expensive for Mr. Sibert to travel to California for his court date on July 18, 2011. The court's clerk has stated that September 26, 2011 at 10:00 a.m., is an available date for the court's calendar. This date would give Mr. Sibert time to purchase airfare when it will cost considerably less to do so, and to complete his work at the lodge during the summer. Mr. Sibert has been diligent and consistent in his contact with counsel; counsel has every reason to believe that he will appear on the date of September 26, 2011 should the court be inclined to grant this request for a continuance of the arraignment. Dustin Johnson, the attorney representing Mr. Sibert's co-defendants, has indicated that the date of September 26 is available on his calendar. He has further stated that he will appear on his clients' behalf should they be unavailable on that date. As a result, all defendants' cases could be continued to one date, September 26, for the court's convenience. Mr. Sibert asks the court to grant his humble request.
Respectfully submitted, DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender COURTNEY FEIN Assistant Federal Defender
The defendant agrees that the ends of justice served by granting his request for a continuance, outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, because the defense requires more time to investigate and negotiate a resolution, as the defendant is unavailable until September 2011. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
The defendant stipulates that for the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, the Court should exclude time from the date of this order through September 26, 2011, for defense preparation and investigation. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) [Local CodeT4].
The government having been contacted and having to date not expressed any opposition to the motion, it is is granted.
Dated: July 7, 2011
Defense Request for Continuance
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.