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. Vasquez

United States District Court, E.D. California

March 4, 2014

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JORGE MEDINA VASQUEZ, and ROBERTO JOSE VASQUEZ, and DIEGO FERNANDO LIMON RODRIGUEZ. Defendants.

TIM F. TUITAVUKI LAW OFFICE OF TIM F. TUITAVUKI STOCKTON, CA, Attorney for Defendant Roberto Jose Vasquez

JILL THOMAS Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME

TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and the defendants, by and through their counsels of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

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

2. By this stipulation, the defendants now move to continue the status conference until April 3, 2014, and to exclude time between March 6, 2014 and April 3, 2014, under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

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 several discs containing audio recordings, and related documents in electronic form. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b. Counsel for the defendant desires additional time to consult with his client, to review the current charges, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges, to review and copy discovery for this matter, to discuss potential resolutions with his client, to prepare pretrial motions, and to otherwise prepare for trial.
c. Counsel for the 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 defendants 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 March, 6, 2014 to April 3, 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 defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice ...

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.