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. Farmer

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit

January 27, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JULIE DIANNE FARMER, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, KIRK E. SHERRIFF, HENRY Z. CARBAJAL III, CHRISTOPHER D. BAKER, Assistant United States Attorneys, Fresno, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America.

ANTHONY P. CAPOZZI, Law Offices of Anthony P. Capozzi, Attorney for defendant Julie Dianne Farmer.

STIPULATION & ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND RESETTING PRETRIAL DATES

LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.

Plaintiff the United States of America ("government") and defendant JULIE DIANNE FARMER, by and through their respective counsel of record, jointly stipulate as follows:

1. Defendant Farmer asserts that, despite defense counsel's diligence and best efforts to complete investigation steps for trial, the defense needs additional time (i) to further investigate matters addressed in interview reports produced by the government, (ii) to designate expert witnesses on handwriting, if necessary based on such further investigation, (iii) to hold the further hearing regarding the remaining proposed testimony of Dr. Terrell, (iv) to provide additional time for the government to designate an expert witness responsive to Dr. Terrell, if necessary, and (v) to designate rebuttal experts, if necessary, regarding the government's four expert witnesses.
2. The government and defendant Farmer stipulate and jointly request that the Court order that the trial date be continued to April 8, 2014, and that the following additional deadlines be set in this case:
a. Feb. 10, 2014, at 11:00am: Hearing regarding the remaining proposed testimony of Dr. Terrell.
b. Feb. 18, 2014: Designation of any rebuttal expert witnesses due.
c. March 10, 2014: Motions in limine (if any) due regarding newly designated expert witnesses.
d. March 17, 2014: Oppositions due re motions in limine.
e. March 24, 2014: Joint proposed jury instructions, proposed disputed jury instructions, objections to disputed jury instructions, and proposed verdict form(s) and objections thereto (if any) to be filed and served.
f. March 31, 2014, at 11:00am: Hearing on proposed disputed jury instructions and proposed verdict form, and on motions in limine (if any). (The parties have previously exchanged proposed jury instructions and verdict forms in this case and have met and conferred on these matters. The parties currently believe that there may be certain limited disputed issues to be addressed with the Court. The parties will continue to confer regarding the jury instructions and verdict form and will promptly notify the Court if this hearing can be vacated).
g. April 1, 2014: Witness lists, proposed voir dire, and trial briefs to be filed and served.
h. April 3, 2014: Exhibit lists and exhibit binders to be served.
3. The government and defendant Farmer stipulate and jointly request that the Court find the following:
a. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny him the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
b. The government does not object to the continuance.
c. The Court has previously declared this to be a complex case, in part based on the volume of discovery and evidence in the case. In addition, based on the above-stated grounds, 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.
d. 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 the present date through April 8, 2014, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), & B(ii), (iv), 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.
e. 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.
4. The parties stipulate and jointly agree that there will be no further continuance of the trial date, absent extraordinary circumstances.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

ORDER

Good cause appearing, IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED. The trial in this case is continued from Feb. 4, 2014 to April 8, 2014, and new pretrial deadlines are set as listed above.

IT IS SO 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.