Opinion
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, BRIAN W. ENOS, Assistant United States Attorney, Fresno, Ca, Attorneys for Plaintiff, United States of America.
GARY HUSS, Attorney for Defendant.
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE (1) NOVEMBER 17, 2015 TRIAL TO JANUARY 19, 2016, AS WELL AS (2) ATTENDANT PRETRIAL DATES
ANTHONY W. ISHII, Senior District Judge.
THE PARTIES HEREBY STIPULATE, through their respective attorneys of record, Assistant United States Attorney Brian W. Enos, counsel for the government, and Gary Huss, Counsel for Defendant Michael Brandon Kiper ("defendant"), that this action's (a) November 17, 2015 jury trial be continued to 8:30 a.m. on Tuesday, January 19, 2016. The parties also stipulate that this action's pretrial deadlines likewise be continued as specifically set forth below.
The parties base this stipulation on good cause. In short, they ask the court to grant their joint request for a trial continuance so they can continue focusing their efforts toward resolving this matter prior to trial, which involves an immense volume of forensic evidence, potentially complex pretrial motions relating to the proper issuance of military warrants, as well as potentially scores of witnesses located throughout the United States and Canada. To explain, the government's charges (originally charged by an Assistant U.S. Attorney now on detail in Europe) involve allegations of defendant's involvement in the receipt of sexually explicit images of minor females located throughout North America. Counsel for both parties have extensively met with the lead computer forensics investigator in this case, Investigator Robert Waggle of the Kings County District Attorney's Office, and reviewed the extent of forensic evidence collected in this case.
Additional work is required on the government's end to pinpoint the extent certain sentencing enhancements apply to the evidence thus far collected and with respect to the witnesses it believes it can locate prior to trial. Rather than significantly curtail these efforts to focus on issues necessary to timely prepare for the November trial date (including suppression issues, in limine issues, preparation of experts, subpoena issuances and elsewise), the parties believe they can complete their efforts in assessing the extent a pre-trial resolution can be reached within the next few weeks. These efforts would also delay any "hardening" of positions by both sides, which also may inhibit their ability to reach a resolution. To accomplish this, they request the present continuance. Counsel for the government has contacted the court, its lead agents, and co-counsel at Main Justice in Washington, D.C. in order to confirm that the below schedule fits within respective calendars.
Pursuant to the reasons set forth, above, the parties request that the following dates be continued in this case:
Existing Dates Requested Continued Dates 1. Pretrial Motions a. Filing of motions - September 14, 2015 November 23, 2015 b. Filing of oppositions - October 5, 2015 December 14, 2015 c. Filing of Reply Briefs - October 13, 2015 December 21, 2015 2. Trial Confirmation Hearing/ - October 19, 2015 January 4, 2016 Hearing on Pretrial Motions 3. Trial - November 17, 2015 January 19, 2016 (8:30 a.m.)
For the above stated reasons, the stipulated continuance will conserve time and resources both for the parties and the court, and the delay resulting from this continuance shall be excluded in the interests of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(3)(A) and 3161(h)(7)(A).
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED.