United States District Court, E.D. California
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, PAUL A. HEMESATH, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America.
Gilbert Roque, Counsel for Defendant GUADALUPE REYES ONTIVEROS.
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER
JOHN A. MENDEZ, District Judge.
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 21, 2014.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until February 4, 2014 at 9:45 a.m., and to exclude time between January 21, 2014, and February 4, 2014 at 9:45 a.m., under Local Code T4.
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 hundreds of pages of written reports, three data-intensive wiretap discs, and dozens of images. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendants desire additional time to consult with their respective clients, review the evidence, and weigh the possibility of settlement.
c) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel 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 January 21, 2014 to February 4, 2014 at 9:45 a.m., inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to excluded under 18 U.S.C. sections 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), corresponding to Local Codes T2 [complex case] and T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare], 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 ...