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. Curtis Lee Johnson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION


January 8, 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
PLAINTIFF,
v.
CURTIS LEE JOHNSON, JR., DEFENDANT.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Maxine M. Chesney United States District Judge

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

STIPULATION

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by the parties, through undersigned counsel, that:

1. The status conference in this case, currently scheduled for January 9, 2013 at 2:15 21 p.m., may (with the Court's concurrence) be continued to February 13, 2013 at 2:15 p.m. 22

2. The period from January 9, 2013 through and including February 13, 2013 may be 23 excluded from the otherwise applicable Speedy Trial Act computation because failure to grant 24 the continuance as requested would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel and 25 the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due 26 diligence. Specifically, the parties represent that, according to the San Francisco Police 27 Department Crime Lab, DNA examination of key evidence in this case (including swabs from 28 the two firearms charged in the pending indictment) will not be concluded until the end of January 2013. The parties further represent that the DNA test results in question will materially 2 affect defense counsel's assessment of pretrial motions and the need for further investigation, as 3 well as potential plea negotiations. 4 5

DATED: January 8, 2013 MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney 6 7 /S/ ANDREW M. SCOBLE 8 Assistant United States Attorney 9 10 DATED: January 8, 2013 /S/ MICHAEL GAINES 11 Counsel for Defendant

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Based upon the above-described Stipulation, THE COURT FINDS THAT the ends of 15 justice served by granting a continuance from January 9, 2013 through and including February 16 13, 2013 outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and that 17 failure to grant such a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel 18 and the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of 19 due diligence. 20

Accordingly, THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1. This case is continued to February 13, 2013 at 2:15 p.m. for further status.

2. The period from January 9, 2013 through and including February 13, 2013 is 23 excluded from the otherwise applicable Speedy Trial Act computation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 24 § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv). 25

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20130108

© 1992-2013 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.