From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Chavez-Vasquez

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
May 8, 2007
CR 07-00085 RMW (N.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)

Opinion

          SCOTT N. SCHOOLS (SCSBN 9990) United States Attorney MARK L. KROTOSKI (CASBN 138549) Chief, Criminal Division BENJAMIN T. KENNEDY (CASBN 241350) Assistant United States Attorney San Jose, California, Attorneys for the United States of America.


          STIPULATION AND [] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM MAY 7, 2007 TO MAY 14, 2007 FROM THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A))

          RONALD M. WHYTE, District Judge

         On May 7, 2007 the parties appeared for a hearing before this Court. At that hearing, defense counsel requested an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act based upon defense counsel's need to effectively prepare by reviewing the defendant's A file and other discovery materials submitted by the government. At that time, the Court set the matter for a hearing on May 14, 2007.

         The parties stipulate that the time between May 7, 2007 and May 14, 2007 is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §3161, and agree that the failure to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Finally, the parties agree that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public, and the defendant in a speedy trial and in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A).

         ORDER

         Based upon the stipulation of the parties, and for good cause shown, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that the time between May 7, 2007 and May 14, 2007 is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §3161. The court finds that the failure to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Furthermore, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. The court therefore concludes that this exclusion of time should be made under 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Chavez-Vasquez

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
May 8, 2007
CR 07-00085 RMW (N.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)
Case details for

United States v. Chavez-Vasquez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LUIS CHAVEZ-VASQUEZ, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division

Date published: May 8, 2007

Citations

CR 07-00085 RMW (N.D. Cal. May. 8, 2007)