United States District Court, C.D. California
ANDRE BIROTTE JR., United States Attorney, ROBERT E. DUGDALE, Assistant United States Attorney, TIMOTHY J. SEARIGHT, Assistant United States Attorney, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ORDER AND FINDINGS OF FACT RE: EXCLUDABLE TIME; STATUS CONFERENCE
GEORGE H. WU, District Judge
THE COURT MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT:
1. For defendants Eduardo Olivares, Roberto Valle, Carlos Verdugo-Miranda, Daniel Verdugo, Antonio Akira-Tomatani and Jason Merritt, and excepting defendant Zaid Wakil for whom different scheduling dates have been established, a status conference is currently set for February 27, 2014. The Court has previously made findings of fact re: Speedy Trial Act for all defendants through February 27, 2014.
2. The government has stated that discovery in this case is voluminous. As an indication of that, the government has provided discovery on an external hard drive. The defendants have indicated that they require further time to review the discovery in preparation for trial and pre-trial motions. Therefore, and pursuant to the stipulation of the above-listed defendants and the government, the Court finds that the period of time from February 27, 2014 through May 1, 2014 is a period of excludable delay because it is a period of delay requested by these defendants and counsel for the government Aon the basis... that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A). Specifically, the court finds, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii), that the case is sufficiently complex due to the number of defendants, the discovery materials provided, and the nature of the prosecution "that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the time limits" established by the Speedy Trial Act. The Court also notes that above listed defendants have indicated that, based upon a review of the indictment, they may pursue various pre-trial motions, including suppression motions and, therefore, the time period is excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D). The court further finds, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), that a failure to grant such a continuance, as requested by each above-listed counsel, would result in a miscarriage of justice in as much as counsel for each defendant has indicated that they are insufficiently prepared for trial.
THE COURT SO FINDS. For the above-listed defendants, and excepting defendant Zaid Wakil for whom different dates have been established, the Court vacates the current status conference date of February 27, 2013 and ...