Opinion
2:12-cr-0400 GEB
04-03-2013
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT K. ROBERSON, Defendant.
DAVID W. DRATMAN Attorney for Defendant ROBERT K. ROBERSON BENJAMIN B. WAGNER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Matthew G. Morris Assistant U.S. Attorney Signed with permission
DAVID W. DRATMAN
Attorney at Law
State Bar No. 78764
1007 7th Street, Suite 305
Sacramento, California 95814
Telephone: (916) 443-2000
Facsimile: (916) 443-0989
Email: dwdratman@aol.com
Attorney for Defendant
ROBERT K. ROBERSON
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]
ORDER CONTINUING STATUS
CONFERENCE, AND EXCLUDING
TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL
ACT
The parties request that the status conference, currently set for April 5, 2013 at 9:00 a.m., be continued to June 14, 2013 at 9:00 a.m., and stipulate that the time beginning April 5, 2013 and extending through June 14, 2013, should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3161.
Defense Counsel is continuing to review the discovery in the case, including making arrangements to view seized computer evidence. Additional time is needed for Defense Counsel to review this discovery.
Accordingly, the parties believe that the forgoing justifies an exclusion of time from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. The additional time is necessary to ensure effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and, continuity of counsel. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv); Local Code T4. The interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).
_______________
DAVID W. DRATMAN
Attorney for Defendant
ROBERT K. ROBERSON
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By: Matthew G. Morris *
Assistant U.S. Attorney
*Signed with permission
ORDER
The Court, having considered the stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its order. Based on the stipulation of the parties, the Court finds that the failure to grant the requested continuance would deny defense counsel 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 continuance outweigh the interests of the public and that the time from April 5, 2013 to and including June 14, 2013, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to Local Code T4 (time for defense counsel to prepare and continuity of counsel)(18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.
Senior United States District Judge