From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Gherasim

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 9, 2013
CASE NO. 2:12-cr-00388-MCE (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:12-cr-00388-MCE

01-09-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL GHERASIM, Defendant.

WILLIAM J. PORTANOVA Attorney for Daniel Gherasim William J. Portanova for LEE BICKLEY Assistant United States Attorney


WILLIAM J. PORTANOVA, State Bar No. 106193
Attorney at Law
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 1100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Telephone: (916) 444-7900
Fax: (916) 444-7998
Attorney for Defendant
Daniel Gherasim

STIPULATION REGARDING

EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS

UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT;

FINDINGS AND ORDER


Date: January 10, 2013

With the Court's permission, defendant Daniel Gherasim and plaintiff United States of America, by and through their undersigned attorneys, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on January 10, 2013;
2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until February 21, 2013 and to exclude time between January 10, 2013 and February 21, 2013 under local code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.
3. The parties agree and stipulate that the Court find that counsel for the defendant requires additional time to review the current charges, to review the extensive discovery, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges and to prepare to discuss the matter with his client.
4. The government does not object to the continuance.
5. 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 under the Speedy Trial Act.
6. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. section 3161, et seq., within which the trial date must commence, the time period of January 10, 2013 to February 21, 2013, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) and Local Code T4 because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's 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.
7. 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:

________

WILLIAM J. PORTANOVA

Attorney for Daniel Gherasim

William J. Portanova for

LEE BICKLEY

Assistant United States Attorney

IT IS SO ORDERED.

________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

United States v. Gherasim

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 9, 2013
CASE NO. 2:12-cr-00388-MCE (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Gherasim

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DANIEL GHERASIM, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 9, 2013

Citations

CASE NO. 2:12-cr-00388-MCE (E.D. Cal. Jan. 9, 2013)