COLIN L. COOPER, SBN 144291, KELLIN R. COOPER, SBN 172111, DUSTIN GORDON, SBN 205216, COOPER LAW OFFICES, Berkeley, California, Attorneys for Defendant, SURJIT SINGH.
MICHAEL CHASTAINE, Attorney for Defendant Anita Sharma
STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE
TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.
Colin L. Cooper, attorney for Surjit Singh, Michael Chastaine, attorney for Anita Sharma, Erik Babcock, attorney for Rajeshwar Singh and Lee Bickley, attorney for the United States of America, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on December 5, 2013.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until January 30, 2014, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between December 5, 2013 and January 30, 2014, under Local Code T4.
3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) All defense counsel desires additional time to review the discovery which is over 6, 000 pages and conduct further investigation. Colin L. Cooper is currently unavailable as he is in a homicide trial in Contra Costa County Superior Court People of the State of California v. Jafari Sargent, docket no. 5-130852-7.
b) Counsel for all defendants believe that the 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.
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 defendants in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
e) 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 December 5, 2013 to January 30, 2014, 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 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 ...