The opinion of the court was delivered by: Dennis L. Beck United States Magistrate Judge
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE; FINDINGS AND ORDER DATE: February 11, 2013 TIME: 1:00 p.m. JUDGE: Hon. Barbara A. McAuliffe
The United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendants, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on December 10, 2012 at 1:00 p.m.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until February 11, 2013 at 1:00 p.m. before Judge McAuliffe, and to exclude time between the date of this stipulation and February 11, 2013 under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (iv). The government 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 includes over 6,500 pages of discovery, including investigative reports and related documents. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b. Counsel for defendant Obdulia Julie Leon desires additional time in preparation of this case. Defense counsel needs additional time to conduct investigation and have further settlement negotiations with the government. Counsel for defendant Bonnie Lynn Recinos has represented that Ms. Recinos is restricted from travel from Arizona to California due to health issues and ongoing medical treatment. Defense counsel has provided the government with correspondence from Ms. Recinos' physician restricting Ms. Recinos' travel. Ms. Recinos' health issues have delayed defense counsel's investigation and preparation of the case. Thus, the requested continuance will conserve time and resources for the parties and the court.
c. Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them 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 of the date of this stipulation to February 19, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (iv) 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 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 ...