From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Christiansen

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Sep 18, 2015
2:13-CR-00018-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2015)

Opinion

          GREGORY W. FOSTER, FOSTER LAW GROUP, Sacramento, CA, Attorney for Dean Christiansen.

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, ANDRE ESPINOSA, Assistant United States Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff United States.


          STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE; FINDING OF EXCLUDABLE TIME

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.

         STIPULATION

         Plaintiff, United States of America, through Assistant U.S. Attorney Andre Espinosa; and defendant Dean Christiansen, through counsel Gregory W. Foster, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

         1. A status conference is currently set for September 17, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.

         2. By this stipulation, the above-named defendant now moves to continue the status conference to September 24, 2015 at 9:00 a.m., and to exclude time between September 17, 2015 and September 24, 2015 under Local Code A and under Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

         3. The basis upon which the parties agree to this proposed continuance of the status conference is as follows:

a. The defendant has undergone competency evaluations by a psychiatrist and a psychologist and both reports have been prepared. Defendant's counsel needs additional time to review the evaluations and consult with defendant's treating psychologist. Additionally, defendant's counsel is involved in a jury trial in state court that may or may not conclude by September 17, 2015 and there is a real possibility that defense counsel will not be available.

4. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case and excluding time as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.

         5. 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 September 17, 2015 to September 24, 2015, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(a) [Local Code A] because it results from a delay from proceedings, including any examinations, to determine the mental competency of the defendant, and the same time period is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(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.

         6. 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.

         7. Finally, Gregory W. Foster has been authorized by all counsel to sign this stipulation on their behalf.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

          ORDER

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Christiansen

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Sep 18, 2015
2:13-CR-00018-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Christiansen

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DEAN LYNN CHRISTIANSEN…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Sep 18, 2015

Citations

2:13-CR-00018-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2015)