Opinion
HEATHER E. WILLIAMS, Bar# 122664, Federal Defender, MATTHEW M. SCOBLE, Bar# 237432, Assistant Federal Defender, Sacramento, California, Attorney for Defendant ALEX LIAO.
BENJAMIN B. HANSEN, United States Attorney, ODD LERAS, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff.
STIPULATION AND ORDER
LAWRENCE K. KARLTON, District Judge.
It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through TODD LERAS, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and defendant, ALEX LIAO, by and through his counsel, MATTHEW M. SCOBLE, Assistant Federal Defender, and BINH THU LAM, by and through his counsel, MICHAEL E. HANSEN, that the status conference set for Tuesday, May 21, 2013, be continued to Tuesday, June 11, 2013, at 9:15 a.m.
The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendants, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case.
It is further stipulated that the time period from the date of this stipulation, through and including the date of the new status conference hearing, June 11, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161 (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv)and Local Code T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare].
ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. It is hereby ordered that the presently set May 21, 2013, status conference shall be continued to June 11, 2013, at 9:15 a.m. It is further ordered that the time period from the date of the parties' stipulation, May 17, 2013, through and including the date of the new status conference hearing, June 11, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare].
Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time for effective preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.