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. Jewel L. Hinkles

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


June 22, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JEWEL L. HINKLES, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Honorable William B. Shubb

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 CYNTHIA CORN

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED ORDER] CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE Date: August 20, 2012 Time: 9:30 a.m.

IT IS HEREBY stipulated between the United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Steven Lapham, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Cynthia Corn, John R. Manning, Esq., counsel for defendant Jewel Hinkles, Jerome Kaplan, Esq., counsel for defendant Bernadette Guidry, Michael L. Chastaine, Esq., counsel for defendant Jesse Wheeler, Thomas A. Johnson, Esq., and counsel for defendant Brent Medearis, Kirk McAllister, Esq., that the status conference presently set for June 25, 2012 be continued to August 20, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., thus vacating the presently set status conference.

Defense counsel requires additional time to review the voluminous discovery and perform investigation. Therefore, counsel for the parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the defendants and the public in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A) (continuity of counsel/ reasonable time for effective preparation) and Local Code T4, and agree to exclude time from the date of the filing of the order until the date of the status conference, August 20, 2012.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

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, June 21, 2012, to and including August 20, 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 June 25, 2012, status conference shall be continued until August 20, 2012, at 9:30 a.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20120622

© 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.