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. Act Jose Alfredo Zamora-Urena

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


October 9, 2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
ACT JOSE ALFREDO ZAMORA-URENA, A.K.A. JOSE ZAMORA,
DEFENDANT.

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

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME PERIODS UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL

Plaintiff United States of America ("government") and defendant, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By prior order, the Court set this matter for status conference to take place on October 12, 2012, and time was excluded through October 12, 2012, pursuant to Excludable Delay Code ("Local Code") T4.

2. The parties had anticipated that the forthcoming status conference would be converted into a change of plea and sentencing proceeding. However, neither party has yet received a copy of the Pre-Plea Advisory Guideline Presentence Investigation Report ("Pre-Plea Report") in this case.

3. By this stipulation, defendant moves to continue the status conference until October 26, 2012, and to exclude time pursuant to Local Code T4. The government does not oppose this request.

4. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find, as follows:

a. The parties represent that as of October 9, 2012, neither party has received the Pre-Plea Report prepared in this case.

b. Defendant's counsel desires additional time to consult with his client, review the Pre-Plea Report, and review the Pre-Plea Report with his client.

c. Defendant's counsel believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him 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 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 from October 12, 2012, through and including October 26, 2012, 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 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.

5. 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.

DATED: October 9, 2012 /s/ Nirav K. Desai NIRAV K. DESAI Assistant U.S. Attorney DATED: October 9, 2012 /s/ Michael Petrik (as authorized on Oct. 9, 2012) MICHAEL PETRIK Counsel for Defendant

ORDER The parties' stipulation, including the proposed findings, is HEREBY APPROVED.

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.

20121009

© 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.