From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Perry

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 14, 2013
Case No.: Cr.S-12-0238-MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 14, 2013)

Opinion

Case No.: Cr.S-12-0238-MCE

03-14-2013

United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Nicholas Perry and Eric Johnston, Defendants

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney Kyle Reardon by Jan David Karowsky Mr. Reardon's approval Kyle Reardon Assistant U.S. Attorney KRESTA DALY Attorney at Law By Jan David Karowsky Ms. Daly's approval Attorney for Defendant Nicholas Perry JAN DAVID KAROWSKY Attorney at Law A Professional Corporation Jan David Karowsky JAN DAVID KAROWSKY Attorney for Defendant Eric Johnston


JAN DAVID KAROWSKY
Attorney at Law
A Professional Corporation
California State Bar Number 53854
716 19th Street, Suite 100
Sacramento, CA 95811-1767
(916) 447-1134
(916) 448-0265 (Fax)
Attorney for Defendant
Eric Johnston

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE

STATUS CONFERENCE


JUDGE: Hon. Morrison E. England, Jr.

All counsel still need additional time for ongoing negotiations. Therefore, it is requested that the Status Conference set for March 14, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. be continued to May 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m.. I have spoken to both AUSA Kyle Reardon and counsel for Mr. Perry, Kresta Daly, both of whom agree to this request and further agree that I may sign their names to it.

STIPULATION

Plaintiff, United States, and Defendants, Nicholas Perry and Eric Johnston, through their undersigned counsel, hereby stipulate and agree that the Court may re-set the date for the Status Conference to May 30, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. The parties further stipulate that time may be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculation from and including the date of March 14, 2013, the date currently set for the Status Conference, to and including May 30, 2013, the new Status Conference date, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T4 in order to give Counsel for the Defendants reasonable time to prepare. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice to be served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendants in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

Kyle Reardon

by Jan David Karowsky

Mr. Reardon's approval

by

Kyle Reardon

Assistant U.S. Attorney

KRESTA DALY

Attorney at Law

By Jan David Karowsky

Ms. Daly's approval

Attorney for Defendant

Nicholas Perry

JAN DAVID KAROWSKY

Attorney at Law

A Professional Corporation

Jan David Karowsky

by

JAN DAVID KAROWSKY

Attorney for Defendant

Eric Johnston

ORDER

Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance of the date now set for a Status Conference in this case would deny respective counsel for all parties reasonable time necessary 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 a continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial and that the time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act is excluded during the time period from and including March 14, 2013, through and including May 30, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§3161(h)(7)(A)&(B)(iv) [reasonable time to prepare] and Local Code T4.

Based on these findings and pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the Court hereby adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR., CHIEF JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Perry

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Mar 14, 2013
Case No.: Cr.S-12-0238-MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 14, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Perry

Case Details

Full title:United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Nicholas Perry and Eric Johnston…

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

Date published: Mar 14, 2013

Citations

Case No.: Cr.S-12-0238-MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 14, 2013)