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. Jennipher Hernandez

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION


March 21, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
JENNIPHER HERNANDEZ
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: D. Lowell Jensen United States District Court Judge

STIPULATION AND ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM MARCH 22, 2012, THROUGH APRIL 11, 2012, FROM THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION 18 U.S.C. § 17 3161(h)(7)(A),(B))

A status hearing is currently set for March 22, 2012, on the Court's calendar. Due to on-21 going discussions between counsel about a potential resolution of the matter, the parties have 22 agreed to seek to move the hearing date to April 11, 2012, if that date is available to the Court. 23 The United States hereby submits this written request for an order finding that said time 24 is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, in that the ends of justice are served 25 by taking such action and outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy 26 trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The failure to grant such a continuance would unreasonably 1 deny counsel for the government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking 2 into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

DATED: March 20, 2012 MELINDA HAAG 5 United States Attorney EUMI L. CHOI Assistant United States Attorney 8 ROBERT LYONS Attorney for Defendant

ORDER

Based upon the stipulation of the parties, and for good cause shown, the Court HEREBY 13 ORDERS that the time from March 22, 2012, through April 11, 2012, is excluded under the 14 Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The Court finds that the ends of justice are served by taking 15 such action and outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. 18 16 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The failure to grant such a continuance would unreasonably deny 17 counsel for defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into 18 account the exercise of due diligence. The Court therefore concludes that this exclusion of time 19 should be made under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). 20 21 IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:

20120321

© 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.