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 v. McCree

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

May 16, 2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
MICHAEL McCREE, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, TODD A. PICKLES, Assistant United States Attorneys, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States of America.

JEFFREY FLETCHER, for the Defendant.

STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT STIPULATION

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

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. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 22, 2013, and then advanced to May 16, 2013.

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until August 8, 2013 and to exclude time between May 16, 2013 and August 8, 2013, under Local Code T4. The United States 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 investigative reports, workers' compensation benefits records, bank records, and other related documents in electronic form constituting over 2240 pages of documents. Further, the United States produced additional discovery relating to a further investigative report. All of this discovery has been produced directly to counsel.

b. Counsel for defendant desires additional time to consult with his client and to review discovery for this matter, and to otherwise prepare for trial. Counsel for defendant also advises that he has information which he intends to provide with the United States and to discuss this information with his client regarding options, including trial.

c. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him/her 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 May 16, 2013 to August 8, 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.

ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.


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.