United Statesv.Neuhaus

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIAJul 12, 2012
Cr. No. S-07-366 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jul. 12, 2012)

Cr. No. S-07-366 GEB

07-12-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DONALD F. NEUHAUS, et al., Defendants.

LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON A Professional Corporation SCOTT L. TEDMON, CA. BAR # 96171 Attorney for Defendant KIMBERLY SNOWDEN


LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON


A Professional Corporation


SCOTT L. TEDMON, CA. BAR # 96171


Attorney for Defendant


KIMBERLY SNOWDEN


STIPULATION AND

ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL

CONFIRMATION HEARING;

FINDING OF EXCLUDABLE TIME


Date: July 13, 2012

Judge: Hon. Garland E. Burrell, Jr.


STIPULATION

Plaintiff, United States of America, through Assistant U.S. Attorneys R. Steven Lapham and Lee S. Bickley; defendant Kimberly Snowden, through her counsel Scott L. Tedmon; defendant Clifford Palm, through his counsel James R. Greiner; defendant Robert Koppel, through his counsel J. Toney, and defendant Mark Wolok, through his counsel Christopher Haydn-Myer, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

1. By previous order, the trial confirmation hearing is set on July 13, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.

2. By this stipulation, the above-named defendants now move to continue the trial confirmation hearing until August 3, 2012 at 9:00 a.m., and to exclude time between July 13, 2012 and August 3, 2012 under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request the Court find the following:

a. Counsel for each defendant desires additional time to consult with their respective client in reviewing the charges and discuss a potential pre-trial resolution of the case.
b. Counsel for each defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny their respective client the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
c. Plaintiff does not object to the continuance.
d. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the trial confirmation hearing as requested outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendants in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
e. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period from July 13, 2012 to August 3, 2012, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3151(h)(7)(a), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance by the Court at the defendants 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 defendants 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.

5. Finally, Scott L. Tedmon has been authorized by all counsel to sign this stipulation on their behalf.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER


United States Attorney


_________________________


R. STEVEN LAPHAM


LEE S. BICKLEY


Assistant United States Attorneys


Attorney for Plaintiff United States


LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON

_________________________


SCOTT L. TEDMON


Attorney for Defendant Kimberly Snowden


LAW OFFICES OF JAMES R. GREINER

_________________________


JAMES R. GREINER


Attorney for Defendant Clifford Palm


LAW OFFICES OF J. TONEY

_________________________


J. TONEY


Attorney for Defendant Robert Koppel


LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTOPHER HAYDN-MYER

_________________________


CHRISTOPHER HAYDN-MYER


Attorney for Defendant Mark Wolok


ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.

_________________________


GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.


Senior United States District Judge