IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
February 9, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
JAYMAR DWAUNE JAMERSON,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell
DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender DOUGLAS BEEVERS, USVI Bar #766 Assistant Federal Defender Designated Counsel for Service 801 I Street, 3rd Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 498-5700 Attorney for Defendant JAYMAR DWAUNE JAMERSON
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER
TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
Date: March 23, 2012
Time: 9:00 a.m.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, SAMUEL WONG, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and DOUGLAS BEEVERS, attorney for JAYMAR JAMERSON, that the status conference hearing date of February 10, 2012, be vacated, and the matter be reset for status conference on March 23, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.
The reason for this continuance is to allow additional time for the preparation of a Pre-Plea Presentence Report. Due to the case load of the probation department and the complexity of JAMERSON's criminal history, the Pre-Plea Presentence Report has not been completed. Both the prosecution and defense believe that a Pre-Plea Presentence Report is well-advised in this case, and that the time taken to prepare such a report will ultimately facilitate a negotiated disposition of the case. United States Probation Officer Ronnie Preap reports that he needs to have until approximately March 2, 2012, to complete the Pre-Plea Presentence Report. Counsel for defendant, in particular, desires the Pre-Plea Presentence Report as a tool to help advise and explain to his client the ramifications of a guilty plea in this case, and desires additional time of a few weeks after the receipt of the Pre-Plea Presentence Report to meet and confer with his client to discuss the Pre-Plea Presentence Report and any plea offer from the United States that may arise as result of the preparation of the Pre-Plea Presentence Report.
The parties agree and stipulate that the Court should find the ends of justice served by the granting of such a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and that time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act should therefore be excluded under 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4 to allow defense counsel reasonable time to prepare, from the date of the parties' stipulation, February 8, 2012, to and including March 23, 2012. The parties further stipulate and agree that the Court should find the failure to grant the requested continuance in this case would deny counsel for defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, the Court adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its Order. It is ordered that the February 10, 2012, status conference hearing shall be continued to March 23, 2012, 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 beginning from the parties' stipulation, February 8, 2012, up to and including the March 23, 2012, 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.
IT IS ORDERED.
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.