Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. McGrath

United States District Court, E.D. California

February 12, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
BRADLEY MCGRATH, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, MICHAEL D. McCOY, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America.

TIM A. PORI, Counsel for Defendant Bradley McGrath.

AMENDED STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS AND ORDER

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through defendant's counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on February 6, 2014.

2. On February 4, 2014, the parties moved to continue the status conference until February 20, 2014, and to exclude time between February 6, 2014 and February 20, 2014, under Local Code T4. However, after filing the Stipulation and Proposed Findings and Order, the parties were informed that the Court would not be in session on February 20, 2014.

3. The Parties now file this Amended Stipulation and Proposed Order requesting to continue the status conference until March 6, 2014.

4. 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 has been either produced directly to counsel or made available for inspection and copying.

b) The parties have been involved in plea negotiations, and the Government has extended a formal plea offer to the defendant. Defense counsel needs additional time to reevaluate the discovery previously provided by the Government, review the formal plea agreement with the defendant, and make recommendations to the defendant regarding acceptance or rejection of the offer. If the defendant decides to enter into the plea agreement, defense counsel will need additional time to prepare the defendant for a change of plea hearing.

c) 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.

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 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.