IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
October 20, 2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell, Jr.
DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender CARO MARKS, Bar #159267 Designated Counsel for Service 801 I Street, 3rd Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 498-5700 Attorney for Defendant MIGUEL HERNANDEZ-TINOCO
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER; CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME Time: 9:00 a.m. Date: November 18, 2011
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, MICHELE BECKWITH, Assistant United States Attorney, and CARO MARKS, attorney for MIGUEL HERNANDEZ-TINOCO, that the status conference hearing date of October 21, 2011 be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on November 18, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.
The reason for this continuance is to allow counsel time to research how certain proposed guidelines amendments (as of November 1, 2011) might affect the defendant's guidelines calculations and resultant sentence. Both counsel need time to government time to conduct such research, after which they will need additional time to prepare a plea agreement and then to review it with the defendant.
Based upon the foregoing, the parties agree that the time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded from the date of signing of this order through and including November 18, 2011 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A)and (B)(iv)[reasonable time to prepare] and Local Code T4 based upon continuity of counsel and defense preparation.
ORDER UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the October 21, 2011, status conference hearing be continued to November 18, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing there from, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel 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 a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. It is ordered that time up to and including the November 18, 2011 status conference shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel reasonable time to prepare.
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge
© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.