United States District Court, E.D. California
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER
SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.
United States of America, by and through its counsel of
record, and defendants, EMILIANO CORTES-GARCIA and LUIS
CORTEZ-GARCIA, by and through their counsel of record, hereby
stipulate as follows:
previous order, this matter was set for status on June 3,
2016, at 9:00 a.m.
this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status
conference until July 8, 2016, at 9:00 a.m., and to exclude
time between June 3, 2016, and July 8, 2016, under Local Code
T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.
parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find
Counsel for defendant Emiliano Cortes-Garcia has been working
with an expert in this case, and based on those
consultations, made a written discovery request of the
government on September 3, 2015. The purpose of the discovery
request was, in part, to obtain documents in support of a
defense motion to dismiss several counts in the indictment
because the statutory scheme for those counts is
September 15, 2015, the government and counsel for Emiliano
Cortes-Garcia had a meeting regarding the discovery request
and narrowed the request by agreement.
January 11, 2016, the government disclosed discovery
responsive to part of the discovery request.
February 25, 2016, defense counsel for Emiliano Cortes-Garcia
filed a motion to compel the discovery in dispute. After
continuances of the discovery motion, the hearing on that
motion is presently scheduled for May 10, 2016, before the
Honorable Edmond F. Brennan.
April 11, 2016, the government produced 6, 400 pages of new
discovery which may satisfy, and thereby moot, defendant
Cortes-Garcia's motion to compel discovery. Counsel for
Cortes-Garcia needs the additional time to review the 6, 400
pages to determine whether it is appropriate to withdraw the
discovery motion or proceed with it. Counsel for
Cortes-Garcia is presently in jury trial in an unrelated case
in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento
(Case No. 14F03944) as part of the justification as to why
additional time is required for counsel preparation.
the defense either withdraws the discovery motion, or obtains
a ruling on the motion, the parties will submit a briefing
schedule to this Court for the motion to dismiss based on the
vagueness of the statutory scheme charged in the indictment.
date, the government has produced approximately 6, 844 pages
of document discovery to the defense. Moreover, the
government has produced over 40 CD/DVD's of discovery to
defendants. These media files contain relevant audio and
video footage obtained during the government's
investigation of this matter. Some of these media files are
three to four hours in length.
defense counsel desire additional time to review the document
discovery, review the afore-mentioned media files, consult
with their client ...