The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable John A. Mendez
JOHN R. MANNING (SBN 220874) ATTORNEY AT LAW 1111 H Street, # 204 Sacramento, CA. 95814 (916) 444-3994 Fax (916) 447-0931 Attorney for Defendant EDWARD SHEVTSOV
Date: December 6, 2011 Time: 9:30 a.m.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER] CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE
IT IS HEREBY stipulated between the United States of America through its undersigned counsel, R. Steven Lapham, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Vera Kuzmenko, Patrick K. Hanly, Esq., counsel for defendant Nadia Kuzmenko, aka Nadia Reyes, Scott L. Tedmon, Esq., counsel for defendant Aaron New, Hayes H. Gable, III, Esq., counsel for defendant Edward Shevtsov, John R. Manning, Esq., counsel for defendant Peter Kuzmenko, Michael L. Chastaine, counsel for defendant Sergey Blizenko, Michael D. Long, Esq., and counsel for defendant Vanik Atoyan, Gary A. Talesfore, Esq., that the status conference presently set for October 11, 2011 be continued to December 6, 2011, at 9:30 a.m., thus vacating the presently set status conference.
Further, all of the parties, the United States of America and all of the defendants as stated above, hereby agree and stipulate that the ends of justice served by the granting of such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial and that time under the Speedy Trial Act should thereforebe excluded under Title 18, United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv), corresponding to Local Codes T-2 (unusual or complex case) and T-4 (to allow defense counsel time to prepare) from the date of the parties' stipulation, October 6, 2011, to and including December 6, 2011. This is based on the complexity of the case, including over 29,000 pages of discovery and the fact there are seven co-defendants.
The defense requests more time to review the discovery and conduct investigation.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. VERA KUZMENKO, et al., Defendants.
[PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERNCE
GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that based on the stipulation of the parties, the Court finds that this case is unusual and complex and that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and trial itself within the time limits established in 18 U.S.C. § 3161. In addition, the Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel to this stipulation reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties' stipulation, October 6, 2011, to and including December 6, 2011, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced in the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv), and Local Codes T2 (unusual and complex case) and T4 (preparation by defense counsel). It is ...