Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States of America v. Ronald Wilkowski

July 13, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
RONALD WILKOWSKI, AND MARIO AVILA. DEFENDANTS,



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Sheila K. Oberto United States Magistrate Judge

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney LAUREL J. MONTOYA Assistant United States Attorneys 2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 Fresno, CA 93721 Telephone: (559) 497-4000 Facsimile: (559) 497-4099 Attorneys for Plaintiff

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 16, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until August 20, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. and to exclude time between July 16, 2012 and August 20, 2012 under

18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv). Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

a. The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.

b. Counsel for defendant Wilkowski is scheduled to begin a jury trial on July 13, 2012 and will be unavailable on the date presently set for status conference in this matter. Further, additional time is needed to consult with the clients and the government regarding plea negotiations and conduct any further investigation that may arise as the result of the negotiations.

c. Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation and resolution, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

d. The government does not object to the continuance.

e. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.

f. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of July 16, 2012 to August 20, 2012, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.