IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
April 29, 2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
JOSE ORTEGA-GUTIERREZ, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Judge: Lawrence K. Karlton
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER EXCLUDING TIME
DATE: June 11, 2013
TIME: 9:15 a.m.
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. This matter was set for status conference on April 30, 2013.
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until June 11, 2013 and to exclude time between April 30, 2013 and June 11, 2013 under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a. Counsel for defendant desires additional time to consult with her client to review the current charges and discovery, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges, and to discuss potential resolutions with her client.
b. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny her the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
c. The government does not object to the continuance.
d. 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.
g. 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 April 30, 2013 to June 11, 2013, inclusive, 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.
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.
DATED: April 29, 2013 JOSEPH SCHLESINGER Acting Federal Defender /s/ Angeles Zaragoza ANGELES ZARAGOZA Counsel for Defendant JOSE ORTEGA-GUTIERREZ DATED: April 29, 2013 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney /s/ Angeles Zaragoza for SAMUEL WONG 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. Based on the stipulation of the parties and the recitation of facts contained therein, the Court finds that 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. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties' stipulation, April 29, 2013, to and including the new June 11, 2013, status conference hearing date 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)(A) and (B) (iv), and Local Code T4 (reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the presently set April 30, 2013, status conference shall be continued to June 11, 2013, at 9:15 a.m.
© 1992-2013 VersusLaw Inc.