Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Aaron Potts

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


January 19, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
AARON POTTS,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. United States District Judge

Timothy E. Warriner Attorney at Law 660 J St., Suite 390 Sacramento, CA 95814 (916) 443-7141 Attorney for defendant, AARON POTTS

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE OF STATUS CONFERENCE AND FOR EXCLUSION OF TIME

Counsel for the government, Jill Thomas, and counsel for defendant Aaron Potts, Timothy E. Warriner, hereby jointly request that the status conference now scheduled for January 20, 2012, be continued to February 24, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., and that time continue to be excluded to February 24, 2012 for preparation of counsel (Local Code T 4; 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)). Exclusion of time is requested as time continues to be needed for counsel to review and evaluate the pre-plea presentence report and written plea agreement, to meet with the client, who is housed in the Butte County Jail, concerning the pre-plea report and plea agreement, and to continue plea negotiations with the Government. Additionally, defense counsel is currently in trial in a Sacramento County murder case. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Respectfully submitted.

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ordered that the status conference set for January 20, 2012 be continued to February 24, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., and that time continue to be excluded to February 24, 2012 for preparation of counsel (Local Code T 4; 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)). The court finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).)

20120119

© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.