IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
June 21, 2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
TOVAR ET AL.,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Hon. William B. Shubb
DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender MATTHEW M. SCOBLE, Bar #237432 Designated Counsel for Service 801 I Street, 3rd Floor Sacramento, California 95814 Telephone: (916) 498-5700 Attorney for Defendant JUN DIRAIN
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER; CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE ) AND EXCLUDING TIME
Date: August 20, 2012
Time: 9:30 a.m.
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED TO between the United States of America through STEVEN LAPHAM, Assistant United States Attorney, JUN DIRAIN by and through his counsel, MATTHEW M. SCOBLE, Assistant Federal Defender, MOCTEZUMA TOVAR by and through his attorney, THOMAS A. JOHNSON, MANUEL HERRERA by and through his attorney, JOHN MANNING, RUBEN RODRIGUEZ by and through his attorney, BRUCE LOCKE, JAIME MAYORGA by and through his attorney RONALD PETERS, SANDRA HERMOSILLO by and through her attorney ERIN RADEKIN and CHRISTIAN RENTERIA by and through his attorney, CHRISTOPHER COSCA, that the status conference presently scheduled for June 25, 2012, be continued to August 20, 2012, at 9:30 a.m. The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendants, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case.
Based upon the foregoing, the parties agree that the time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded from the date of signing of this order through and including August 20, 2012 pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A)and (B)(iv)[reasonable time to prepare] and Local Code T4 based upon continuity of counsel and defense preparation.
UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the June 25, 2012, status conference hearing be continued to August 20, 2012, at 9:30 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 up to and including the August 20, 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.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.