Opinion
STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; [PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
EDMUND F. BRENNAN, Magistrate Judge.
STIPULATION
1. To clarify the record, the parties submit the following Stipulation Regarding Excludable Time Period Under the Speedy Trial Act and Proposed Findings and Order.
2. On November 10, 2015, the Court entered an Amended Minute Order, vacating the hearing date and setting the matter in front of Judge Nunley on December 10, 2015. The Court excluded time pursuant to Local Code T4 from November 10, 2015, until December 10, 2015, finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Although the Court made that finding, it did not expressly include a factual basis in support of that finding.
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, Rosanne L. Rust, Assistant United States Attorney, Sacramento, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America.
Michael Bigelow, Counsel for Defendant Meghan Paradis.
Christopher Cosca, Counsel for Defendant Vuthiya Tim.
3. The parties seek to provide a factual basis at this time to ensure that the Court's T-4 exclusion is sustained. Specifically, the parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:
a) The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case includes disks worth of data, containing video footage, photographs and other documents. All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection and copying.
b) Counsel for defendants desire additional time to consult with their respective clients, and to review and analyze the produced discovery.
c) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) The government does not object to the continuance.
e) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
f) For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of November 10, 2015 to December 10, 2015, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4] because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants' request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.
4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial must commence.
IT IS SO STIPULATED.
[PROPOSED] FINDINGS AND ORDER
IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.