Opinion
CASE NO. 11-CR-411
07-12-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOSE RIOS, LUIS ALBERTO CORTEZ, AND ALFONSO MINJARES ESTRADA, Defendants,
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney YASIN MOHAMMAD Assistant United States Attorneys Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
YASIN MOHAMMAD
Assistant United States Attorneys
Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE
STATUS CONFERENCE AND
EXCLUDE TIME PERIODS UNDER
SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED]
FINDINGS AND ORDER
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE
AND TO EXCLUDE TIME UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record above, and defendants, by and through their counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on July 16, 2012.
2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until August 20, 2012 and to exclude time between July 16, 2012 and August 20, 2012 under Local Code T4 and 18 U.S.C. § 3161. Plaintiff stipulates to 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 investigative reports, lab reports, audio and video files, and wiretap evidence including voluminous translations. Much of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying. The government recently received a new wave of wiretap and related discovery that will be produced by the end of this week.
b. Counsel for defendant desires additional time consult with his/her 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/her client, to prepare pretrial motions, and to otherwise prepare for trial.
c. The Parties believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny the defendants the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and for further plea negotiations.
d. The government stipulates 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 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 July 16, 2012 to August 13, 2012, 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 served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
4. 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. IT IS SO STIPULATED.
_________________________
YASIN MOHAMMAD
Assistant United States Attorney
_________________________
PRECILIANO MARTINEZ
Counsel for Defendant Rios
_________________________
JIM ELIAS
Counsel for Defendant Cortez
_________________________
MARK BROUGHTON
Counsel for Defendant Estrada
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Sheila K. Oberto
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE