Opinion
CASE NO. 2:12-CR-00415 LKK RELATED CASE NO. 2:05-CR-00165 LKK
02-04-2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JOSE ANTONIO MURILLO-CAMACHO, aka Jose Murillo-Camacho, aka Antonio Camacho, aka Antonio Murillo, aka Antonio Murillo Camacho, aka Antonio Jose Murillo, Defendant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ANTONIO JOSE MURILLO, Defendant.
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney NIRAV K. DESAI Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
NIRAV K. DESAI
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff
United States of America
ORDER EXCLUDING TIME PERIODS UNDER
THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
The parties appeared before the undersigned for a status conference on January 29, 2013, and requested that the matter be continued to March 5, 2013, for a status conference. This case has been ordered related to the case of United States v. Murillo, 2:05-cr-00165 LKK (E.D. Cal.), in which a petition for violation of supervised release has been filed. However, defendant has not yet made an initial appearance in Murillo, and the parties would prefer to resolve both related cases in a single proceeding.
The parties represent that they require time to proceed in the Murillo case with a view toward resolution of the related cases at the same time. On the basis of counsel's representations and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that time from the January 29, 2013 status conference to and including the March 5, 2013 status conference 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)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, to allow defense counsel time to prepare.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________
LAWRENCE K. KARLTON
SENIOR JUDGE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
____________
NIRAV K. DESAI
Assistant United States Attorney