From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Johnston

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jan 23, 2013
2:12-cr-452 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2013)

Opinion

          JOSEPH SCHLESINGER, Bar# 87692 Acting Federal Defender BENJAMIN D. GALLOWAY, Bar #214897 Assistant Federal Defender Designated Counsel for Service, Sacramento, California, Attorney for Defendant, ALLAN JAMES JOHNSTON


          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDE TIME

          GARLAND E. BURRELL, Jr., Senior District Judge.

         IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, MATTHEW SEGAL, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, and BENJAMIN D. GALLOWAY, Assistant Federal Defender, attorney for Defendant, ALLAN JAMES JOHNSTON, that the status conference set for Friday, January 25, 2013 be continued to Friday, February 22, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.

         The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendant, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

         Speedy trial time is to be excluded from the date of this order through the date of the status conference set for February 22, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv) [reasonable time to prepare] (Local Code T4).

         AGREED:

          ORDER

         The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. The Court specifically finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial.

         The Court orders that the time from the date of the parties stipulation, up to and including February 22, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) T4 (reasonable time for counsel to prepare). It is further ordered that the January 25, 2013 status conference shall be continued until February 22, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.


Summaries of

United States v. Johnston

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jan 23, 2013
2:12-cr-452 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Johnston

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ALLAN JAMES JOHNSTON, Defendant.

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

Date published: Jan 23, 2013

Citations

2:12-cr-452 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 23, 2013)