From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Pisco

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Oct 6, 2021
No. 21-CR-2293-JLS (S.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2021)

Opinion

21-CR-2293-JLS

10-06-2021

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. RONALD VINICIO ALVARADO PISCO, et. al. Defendants.


ORDER CONTINUING MOTION HEARING / TRIAL SETTING AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

JANIS L. SAMMARTINO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

The parties jointly move to continue the motion hearing / trial setting set for October 8, 2021, at 1:30 p.m. The parties also jointly move to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(1)(D), 3161(h)(1)(F), 3161(h)(7) and 3161(h)(8).

For reasons stated in the joint motion, incorporated by reference herein, the Court finds the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial.

In addition, given the grave public-health concerns discussed in Order of the Chief Judge Nos. 18, 24, 27, 30, 33, 34, 40, 47, 50, 52, 52-A, 52-B, 52-C, 60, 63, 63-A, 63-B, 63-C, 63-D, and 63-E, the ends of justice served by a continuance in this case outweigh the best interest of the public and Defendants in a speedy trial. Failure to grant the continuance would be likely to make a continuation of the proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice. Failure to continue the case would also likely put counsel, parties, witnesses, and Court personnel at unnecessary risk. Due to the restrictions imposed by current public-health concerns it is also unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the Speedy Trial Act time limits. Thus, denial of a continuance is likely to deny all counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

Accordingly, the Court finds that there are facts that support a continuance of the hearing date in this matter, and good cause for a finding of excludable time pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161.

The Court further finds that time should continue to be deemed excludable under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(1)(D), 3161(h)(1)(F), 3161(h)(7) and 3161(h)(8).

IT IS ORDERED that the joint motion is granted. The motion hearing / trial setting shall be continued to January 14, 2022, at 1:45 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time between the filing of the joint motion until December 13, 2021, be deemed excludable time under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(1)(D), 3161(h)(7) and 3161(h)(8), in addition to any time excludable, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(F), resulting from pretrial motions already filed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Pisco

United States District Court, Southern District of California
Oct 6, 2021
No. 21-CR-2293-JLS (S.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2021)
Case details for

United States v. Pisco

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. RONALD VINICIO ALVARADO PISCO, et. al…

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of California

Date published: Oct 6, 2021

Citations

No. 21-CR-2293-JLS (S.D. Cal. Oct. 6, 2021)