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. Joseph andrade and Jonathan Sherman

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


September 7, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,
v.
JOSEPH ANDRADE AND JONATHAN SHERMAN,
DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Senior United States District Judge

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 JOSEPH ANDRADE

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER Date: October 19, 2012 Time: 9:00 a.m. Judge: Honorable Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

The United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Jill Thomas, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Joseph Andrade, John R. Manning, Esq., and counsel for defendant Jonathan Sherman, Shari Rusk, Esq., hereby stipulate the following:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on September 7, 2012.

2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until October 19, 2012 and to exclude time between September 7, 2012 and October 19, 2012 under the Local CodeT-4 (to allow defense counsel time to prepare).

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

a. Counsel for the defendants need additional time to review the discovery and conduct investigation.

b. Currently the discovery in this case includes 2,962 pages, 14 video DVDs, and 1 audio CD.

c. Counsel for defendants believe 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.

d. The Government does not object to the continuance.

e. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.

f. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) within which trial must commence, the time period of September 7, 2012 to October 19, 2012, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to

18 United States Code Section 3161(h)(7)(A) ) and (B)(ii) and (iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4 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 the period within which a trial must commence.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.

20120907

© 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.