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. Kenneth Eaton

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


August 17, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
KENNETH EATON, ET AL. DEFENDANTS

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. John A. Mendez United States District Court Judge

LAW OFFICES OF CHRIS COSCA CHRIS COSCA (SBN 144546) 1007 7th Street, Suite 210 Sacramento, CA. 95814 Tel. (916) 440-1010 Fax (877) 440-1012 Attorney for Defendant KENNETH EATON

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

STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the defendants, by and through each counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on August 21, 2012.

2. By this stipulation, the defendants now move to continue the status conference until September 25, 2012 at 9:45 a.m., and to exclude time between August 21, 2012, and September 25, 2012 under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a. This case was declared complex at an early stage. Discovery includes approximately 1398 pages of investigative reports, related documents in electronic form, and 11 CD/DVDs. Discovery also includes voluminous recordings and summaries related to wiretaps on three target telephones numbers. This discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying. b. Counsel for the defendants desire additional time to consult with their respective clients, to review the current charges, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges, to review and copy discovery for this matter, and to otherwise prepare. In addition, all parties are currently discussing potential resolution, but more time is needed to complete these discussions. c. Counsel for the defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, 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 defendants 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 August 21, 2012, to September 25, 2012, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants' 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 defendants 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 the period within which a trial must commence.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

John A. Mendez

20120817

© 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.