From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Taylor

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 11, 2013
11-215 MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)

Opinion

          JOSEPH SCHLESINGER, #87692 Acting Federal Defender, MICHAEL PETRIK, Jr., #177913 Assistant Federal Defender, Sacramento, California. Attorneys for Defendant


          STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE TO APRIL 4, 2013, AT 9:00 A.M.

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., District Judge.

         THE PARTIES STIPULATE, through counsel, Jill M. Thomas, Assistant United States Attorney, and Michael Petrik, Jr., attorney for Mr. Taylor, that the Court should vacate the status conference scheduled for March 7, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., and reset it for April 4, 2013, at 9:00 a.m.

         Defense counsel has received a proposed plea agreement from the government that may resolve this matter; however, counsel requires time to meet with Mr. Taylor and discuss the proposed resolution. Counsel also requires time to review the proposed plea agreement in conjunction with discovery the government has provided.

         The parties further stipulate that the Court should exclude the period from the date of this order through April 4, 2013, when it computes the time within which the trial of the above criminal prosecution must commence for purposes of the Speedy Trial Act. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by granting Mr. Taylor's request for a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and Mr. Taylor in a speedy trial, and that this is an appropriate exclusion of time for defense preparation within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7) (Local Code T4).

          ORDER

         IT IS SO ORDERED. The status conference is reset for April 4, 2013, at 9:00 a.m. The Court finds that a continuance is necessary for the reasons stated above, and further finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Time is therefore excluded from the date of this order through April 4, 2013, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7) (Local Code T4).]

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Taylor

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Mar 11, 2013
11-215 MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Taylor

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GERALD DONALD TAYLOR, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Mar 11, 2013

Citations

11-215 MCE (E.D. Cal. Mar. 11, 2013)