Opinion
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, CHRISTIAAN H. HIGHSMITH, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States of America.
BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, Counsel for Defendant Ernie Juarez.
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING PURSUANT TO RULE 5.1(d) AND EXCLUSION OF TIME
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its attorney of record, Assistant United States Attorney CHRISTIAAN H. HIGHSMITH, and defendant ERNIE JUAREZ, both individually and by and through his counsel of record, BENJAMIN GALLOWAY, hereby stipulate as follows:
1. The Complaint in this case was filed on June 19, 2013, and the defendant first appeared before a judicial officer of the Court in this case on June 11, 2015. In the interim, the defendant was in state custody serving a sentence on a separate matter based on underlying facts separate from this case. At the Court's June 11, 2015, hearing, the Court set a preliminary hearing date of June 25, 2015.
2. Following a joint stipulation signed by the parties, filed on June 16, 2015, the Court signed an order setting the preliminary hearing date for August 6, 2015. See Order, June 17, 2015 (ECF No. 7).
3. The parties filed another joint stipulation on August 5, 2015, seeking to continue the preliminary hearing to August 20, 2015, which the Court signed. See Order, August 6, 2015 (ECF No. 9).
4. By this stipulation, the parties jointly move for an extension of time of the preliminary hearing date to September 8, 2015, at 2:00 p.m., before the duty Magistrate Judge, pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. The parties stipulate that the delay is required to allow the defense reasonable time for preparation, for the government's continuing investigation of the case, and for the parties to continue to evaluate the evidence as they discuss a potential pre-indictment resolution of the case. The parties further agree that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
5. The parties agree that good cause exists for the extension of time, and that the extension of time would not adversely affect the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. Therefore, the parties request that the time between August 20, 2015, and September 8, be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), Local Code T-4.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
The Court has read and considered the Stipulation for Extension of Time for Preliminary Hearing Pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) and Exclusion of Time, filed by the parties in this matter on August 19, 2015. The Court hereby finds that the Stipulation, which this Court incorporates by reference into this Order, demonstrates good cause for an extension of time for the preliminary hearing date pursuant to Rule 5.1(d) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Furthermore, for the reasons set forth in the parties' stipulation, the Court finds that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court further finds that the extension of time would not adversely affect the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases.
THEREFORE, FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN:
1. The date of the preliminary hearing is extended to September 8, at 2:00 p.m.
2. The time between August 20, 2015, and September 8, shall be excluded from calculation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
3. Defendants shall appear at that date and time before the Magistrate Judge on duty.
IT IS SO ORDERED.