From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Lee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 11, 2013
Case No.: 12-CR-00301 AWI (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2013)

Opinion

Case No.: 12-CR-00301 AWI

01-11-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STACEY KINYADA LEE DEANA SHIRELLE NOLEN WILLIE SHERMAN PRUDE CHEANEY LAVELL KEY ERISHENIQUA D. DIXON, Defendant,

CHARLES J. LEE Attorney for Defendant Stacey Kinyada Lee ANTHONY P. CAPOZZI Attorney for Defendant Deana Shirelle Nolan CARL FALLER Attorney for Defendant Willie Sherman Prude EDWARD MARSHALL HODGKINS Attorney for Defendant Cheaney Lavell Key DAVID A. TORRES Attorney for Defendant David A. Torres KIRK SHERIFF Assistant United Stated Attorney


DAVID A. TORRES AND ASSOCIATES
Attorney at Law, SBN 135059
1318 K Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Ph.: (661)326-0857
Fax.: (661) 326-0936
e-mail: lawtorres@aol.com
Attorney for Defendant
ERISHENIQUA DIXON

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

CONTINUE CHANGE OF PLEA

HEARING

TO: THE CLERK OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, HONORABLE: ANTHONY W. ISHII AND KIRK SHERIFF, ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY:

COMES NOW Defendant, ERISHENIQUA DIXON, by and through her attorney of record, DAVID A. TORRES hereby request that the change of plea hearing date currently set for Monday, January 14, 2013 be continued to January 28, 2013 or a date convenient to court and counsel.

I have had difficulty meeting with my client in that she does not have transportation. She resides in Mojave which is 1 hour and 45 minutes from Bakersfield. She does not own a vehicle nor does she have reasonable means to travel to Bakersfield. Currently Ms. Dixon is in the process of finding transportation to Bakersfield to review the plea agreement. This is a mutual agreement between myself, all co-counsel and Assistant United States Attorney Kirk Sheriff.

The defendant is willing to continue excluding time through the next court appearance and that the ends of justice in the exclusion outweigh defendant's speedy trial rights.

Based upon the foregoing, I respectfully request that this matter be continued to January 28, 2013.

The parties also agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded in the interest of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A) and §3161 (h)(7)(B)(i) & (iv).

_________________

CHARLES J. LEE

Attorney for Defendant

Stacey Kinyada Lee

______________________

ANTHONY P. CAPOZZI

Attorney for Defendant

Deana Shirelle Nolan

______________________

CARL FALLER

Attorney for Defendant

Willie Sherman Prude

______________________

EDWARD MARSHALL HODGKINS

Attorney for Defendant

Cheaney Lavell Key

______________________

DAVID A. TORRES

Attorney for Defendant

David A. Torres

______________________

KIRK SHERIFF

Assistant United Stated Attorney

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED. Time is excluded in the interest of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and §3161 (h)(7)(B)(i) & (iv). IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Lee

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 11, 2013
Case No.: 12-CR-00301 AWI (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Lee

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STACEY KINYADA LEE DEANA SHIRELLE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 11, 2013

Citations

Case No.: 12-CR-00301 AWI (E.D. Cal. Jan. 11, 2013)