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. Richard Daleman

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


May 23, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
RICHARD DALEMAN,
DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge

DANIEL J. BRODERICK, #89424 Federal Defender MARC DAYS, CA Bar #184098 Assistant Federal Defenders Designated Counsel for Service 2300 Tulare Street, Suite 330 Fresno, California 93721-2226 Telephone: (559) 487-5561 Attorney for Defendant RICHARD DALEMAN

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE MOTIONS SCHEDULE AND HEARING; ORDER Date: July 9, 2012 Time: 1:00 PM

Judge: Hon. Dennis L. Beck

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, and through their respective attorneys of record herein, that the motions hearing now set for May 29, 2012, may be continued to July 9, 2012, at 1:00 P.M., and that a new motions schedule be set as follows:

Event: Present Date: Requested New Date:

Motions Due April 23, 2012 June 11, 2012 Responses Due May 14, 2012 June 25, 2012 Hearing May 29, 2012 - 1:00 P.M. July 9, 2012 - 1:00 P.M.

The parties have been engaged in serious settlement negotiations. Since the last hearing there has been a counter offer and counter to the counter offer. The parties have made significant progress in plea negotiations and, in the event the case does not resolve, may be able to resolve the discovery issues that would be the subject of a motion.

The continuance is requested by counsel for the defendant to allow counsel an opportunity to review with the defendant the government's most recent offer and allow additional time to resolve the parties discovery dispute or file an appropriate motion if necessary. The requested continuance will conserve time and resources for both counsel and the court. AUSA Kathleen Servatius has no objection to the requested continuance. The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded in the interests of justice, including but not limited to, the need for the period of time set forth herein for further defense preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B), and that the interest of justice outweighs the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial

ORDER IT IS SO ORDERED. For the reasons set forth above, the continuance requested is granted for good cause and the Court finds the interest of justice outweighs the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120523

© 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.