From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Murillo-Camacho

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 8, 2013
Case No.: 12-415 LKK (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2013)

Opinion

Case No.: 12-415 LKK

01-08-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO, Defendant.

NIRAV DESAI Attorney for Plaintiff CLEMENTE M. JIMNEZ Attorney for JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO


CLEMNTE M. JIMÉNEZ, SBN 207136
428 J Street, Suite 355
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 443-8055
Attorney for Defendant
JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO

STIPULATION AND ORDER

VACATING DATE, CONTINUING

CASE, AND EXCLUDING TIME


JUDGE: Hon. Lawrence K. Karlton

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between Assistant United States Attorney Nirav Desai, Counsel for Plaintiff, and Attorney Clemente M. Jimé?nez, Counsel for Defendant JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO, that the status conference scheduled for January 8, 2013, at 9:15 a.m., be vacated and the matter continued to this Court's criminal calendar on January 15, 2013, at 9:15 a.m. for further status conference and anticipated change of plea.

Defense counsel recently substituted in as counsel of record, and required time to become familiar with the case. The government has extended a fast track offer which defense counsel requires further time to discuss with Mr. Murillo-Camacho.

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that time for trial under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3161 et seq. be tolled pursuant to Section 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv), (Local code T-4), and that the ends of justice served in granting the continuance and allowing the defendants further time to prepare outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial.

_____________

NIRAV DESAI

Attorney for Plaintiff

_____________

CLEMENTE M. JIMɐNEZ

Attorney for JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED, that the status conference in the above-entitled matter, scheduled for January 8, at 9:15 a.m., be vacated and the matter continued to January 15, 2013, at 9:15 a.m. for further status conference. The Court finds that time under the Speedy Trial Act shall be excluded through that date in order to afford counsel reasonable time to prepare. Based on the parties' representations, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants to a speedy trial.

_____________

IAWRENCE K KARLTON

SENIOR JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT


Summaries of

United States v. Murillo-Camacho

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 8, 2013
Case No.: 12-415 LKK (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Murillo-Camacho

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO…

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

Date published: Jan 8, 2013

Citations

Case No.: 12-415 LKK (E.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2013)