The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable Garland E. Burrell, Jr.
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 RONALD REEVES
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER] CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE
Date: June 29, 2012 Time: 9:00 a.m.
IT IS HEREBY stipulated between the United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Daniel S. McConkie, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Jose Aguilar-Madriz, Preciliano Martinez, Esq., counsel for defendant Ronald Reeves, John R. Manning, Esq., counsel for defendant Artemio Aguilar, Dan F. Koukol, Esq., counsel for defendant Juan Silva, Carl E. Larson, Esq., counsel for defendant Salvador Silva, J Toney, Esq., counsel for defendant David Martinelli, Michael B. Bigelow, Esq., counsel for defendant Gregorio Zapien-Mendoza, Scott N. Cameron, Esq., counsel for defendant Gabino Cuevas-Hernandez, Hayes H. Gable, III, Esq., counsel for defendant Moses Puledo Aguilar, Clemente M. Jimenez, Esq., counsel for defendant German Alvarez Ortega, Preeti K. Bajwa, Esq., counsel for defendant Adam Gutierrez Cruz, Erin J. Radekin, Esq., counsel for defendant Manuel Madriz Sanchez, Kyle R. Knapp, Esq., and counsel for defendant Pedro Aguilar Aguilar, Olaf W. Hedberg, Esq., that the status conference presently set for April 27, 2012 be continued to June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m., thus vacating the presently set status conference. Defendant Sarah Marshall wishes to remain on calendar for a change of plea.
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 therefore be excluded under Title 18, United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv) and Local Code T-4 (to allow defense counsel time to prepare) from the date of the parties stipulation, April 25, 2012, to and including June 29, 2012. The requested continuance is to allow the defense more time to review the discovery and conduct investigation.
The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. Based on the stipulation of the parties and the recitation of facts contained therein, the Court finds 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, April 25, 2012, to and including June 29, 2012, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii) and (iv), and Local Codes T4 (reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the April 27, 2012, status conference shall be continued until June 29, 2012, at 9:00 a.m.
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR. United States District Judge
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw ...