From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Buckley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 3, 2013
CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00081 JAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00081 JAM

04-03-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JIMMY JACK BUCKLEY, Defendant

MICHAEL D. McCOY Assistant United States Attorney DANNY D. BRACE, JR. Counsel for Defendant EDWIN WILLIAM BALERO Per telephone authorization


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
MICHAEL D. McCOY
Assistant United States Attorney
501 I Street, Suite 10-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 554-2700
Facsimile: (916) 554-2900
Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

FROM APRIL 9, 2013 TO MAY 21,

2013


STIPULATION

Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status conference on April 9, 2013.

2. By this stipulation, the parties move to continue the status conference until May 21, 2013, and to exclude time between April 9, 2013, and May 21, 2013, under Local Code T4.

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

a. Discovery has been produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b. Counsel for defendant needs additional time to consult with his client, to review the current charge, to conduct investigation and research related to the charge, to prepare pretrial motions, discuss potential resolutions with his client
and/or otherwise prepare for trial.
c. Counsel for 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 joins in the request for 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 April 9, 2013, to May 21, 2013, 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 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 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.

______________

MICHAEL D. McCOY

Assistant United States Attorney

______________

DANNY D. BRACE, JR.

Counsel for Defendant EDWIN WILLIAM BALERO

Per telephone authorization
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,

v.
JIMMY JACK BUCKLEY, Defendant.

CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00081 JAM


ORDER CONTINUING STATUS

CONFERENCE FROM APRIL 9, 2013,

TO MAY 21, 2013

The parties' stipulation is approved and so ordered. The time beginning April 9, 2013, until May 21, 2013 at 9:45 a.m., is excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. For the reasons contained in the parties' stipulation, this exclusion is appropriate to ensure effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), (B)(iv); [Local Code T4]. The interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq.

______________

JOHN A. MENDEZ

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Buckley

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Apr 3, 2013
CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00081 JAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Buckley

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JIMMY JACK BUCKLEY, Defendant

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Apr 3, 2013

Citations

CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00081 JAM (E.D. Cal. Apr. 3, 2013)