IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
March 20, 2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
ADRES VALENZUELA AND ARISTEO HERRERA,
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Garland E. Burrell, Jr. Senior United States District Judge
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND
DATE: April 26, 2013
TIME: 9:00 a.m.
JUDGE: Hon. Garland E. Burrell
It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through DANIEL McCONKIE, Assistant U.S. Attorney; defendant ADRES VALENZUELA by and through his counsel, BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, Assistant Federal Defender; and defendant ARISTO HERRERA, by and through his counsel, DINA SANTOS, that the status conference set for Friday, March 22, 2013 be continued to Friday, April 26, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.
The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendant, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case.
The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
Speedy trial time is to be excluded from the date of this order through the date of the status conference set for April 26, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv) [reasonable time to prepare] (Local Code T4).
DATED: March 19, 2013 Respectfully submitted, JOSEPH SCHLESINGER Acting Federal Defender /s/ Benjamin Galloway BENJAMIN GALLOWAY Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant ANDRES VALENZUELA /s/ Dina Santos DINA SANTOS Attorney for Defendant ARISTEO HERRERA DATED: March 19, 2013 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney /s/ Benjamin Galloway for DANIEL McCONKIE Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff
The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. The Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial.
The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties stipulation, up to and including April 26, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) T4 (reasonable time for counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the March 22, 2013 status conference shall be continued until April 26, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.