Opinion
Cr. No. S-10-395 LKK
02-26-2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALFREDO DEL TORO, et al., Defendants.
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney TODD D. LERAS Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff United States LAW OFFICES OF ANTHONY J. PALIK ANTHONY J. PALIK Attorney for Defendant Luis Eduardo Sanchez LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON SCOTT L. TEDMON Attorney for Defendant Sean Blackwell LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL L. CHASTAINE MICHAEL L. CHASTAINE Attorney for Defendant Jerone Bryant Wells LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTOPHER R. COSCA CHRISTOPHER R. COSCA Attorney for Defendant Gabriel Fernando Garcia LAW OFFICES OF DANNY D. BRACE, JR. DANNY D. BRACE, JR. Attorney for Defendant Gregorio Tellez LAW OFFICES OF ERIN J. RADEKIN ERIN J. RADEKIN Attorney for Defendant Searcy Andrews
LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON
A Professional Corporation
SCOTT L. TEDMON, CA. BAR # 96171
980 Ninth Street, 16th Floor
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone: (916) 449-9985
Facsimile: (916) 446-7104
Email: tedmonlaw@comcast.net
Attorney for Defendant
SEAN BLACKWELL
STIPULATION AND
ORDER CONTINUING STATUS
CONFERENCE; FINDING OF
EXCLUDABLE TIME
Judge: Hon. Lawrence K. Karlton
STIPULATION
Plaintiff, United States of America, through Assistant United States Attorney Todd D. Leras; defendant Luis Eduardo Sanchez, through counsel Anthony J. Palik; defendant Sean Blackwell, through counsel Scott L. Tedmon; defendant Jerone Bryant Wells, through counsel Michael L. Chastaine; defendant Gabriel Fernando Garcia, through counsel Christopher R. Cosca; defendant Gregorio Tellez, through counsel Danny D. Brace, Jr.; and defendant Searcy Andrews, through counsel Erin J. Radekin, hereby stipulate and agree as follows:
1. A status conference is currently set for February 26, 2013 at 9:15 a.m.
2. By this stipulation, the above-named defendants now move to continue the status conference to March 26, 2013 at 9:15 a.m., and to exclude time between February 26, 2013 and March 26, 2013 under Local Code T2 and 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. This case was the product of a lengthy investigation in which wiretaps were utilized. The government has produced discovery which contains wiretap applications, periodic reports, and investigative materials. Additionally, the government has provided defense counsel with voluminous wiretap conversations. Taking the discovery and further investigation into consideration, the case has been severed into two groups. The government has advised defense counsel in Group Two the case has progressed to the point where plea offers will now be extended to each defendant in Group Two. This stipulation relates only to Group Two and counsel for each defendant in Group Two needs additional time to meet and confer with the government, review proposed plea agreements, and confer with each counsel's respective client in an effort to resolve the case short of trial.
b. Counsel for each defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny their respective client reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, which includes plea negotiations with the government, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
c. The discovery in this case and the facts of the alleged conspiracy are "complex" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii), [Local Code T2]. This Court has previously found this case to be "complex" and excluded time pursuant to Local Code T2, and the parties agree to such a finding of complexity.
d. Plaintiff does not object to the continuance.
e. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the status conference 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.
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 from February 26, 2013 to March 26, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
3161(h)(7)(a), B(ii) and (iv); [Local Code T2 and 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
______________
TODD D. LERAS
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for Plaintiff United States
LAW OFFICES OF ANTHONY J. PALIK
______________
ANTHONY J. PALIK
Attorney for Defendant Luis Eduardo Sanchez
LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT L. TEDMON
______________
SCOTT L. TEDMON
Attorney for Defendant Sean Blackwell
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL L. CHASTAINE
______________
MICHAEL L. CHASTAINE
Attorney for Defendant Jerone Bryant Wells
LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTOPHER R. COSCA
______________
CHRISTOPHER R. COSCA
Attorney for Defendant Gabriel Fernando Garcia
LAW OFFICES OF DANNY D. BRACE, JR.
______________
DANNY D. BRACE, JR.
Attorney for Defendant Gregorio Tellez
LAW OFFICES OF ERIN J. RADEKIN
______________
ERIN J. RADEKIN
Attorney for Defendant Searcy Andrews
ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED this 26th day of February, 2013.
______________
LAWRENCE K. KARLTON
SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT