Opinion
CR. NO. 2:12-cr-00221-MCE
07-05-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. CHARLES ALEXANDER, et al., DEFENDANTS.
Respectfully submitted, BENJAMIN WAGNER UNITED STATES ATTORNEY Daniel S. McConkie, Jr. ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY ATTORNEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF Michael B. Bigelow Attorney for defendant Jusstanene King James R. Greiner Attorney for Defendant Charles Alexander
JAMES R. GREINER, ESQ.
CALIFORNIA STATE BAR NUMBER 123357
LAW OFFICES OF JAMES R. GREINER
ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT
CHARLES ALEXANDER
STIPULATION AND
ORDER FOR CONTINUING THE CASE
TO THURSDAY AUGUST 30, 2012
The parties to this litigation, the Unites States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Mr. Daniel S. McConkie, Jr., and defendant, Jusstanene King, represented by attorney Mr. Michael B. Bigelow and defendant, Charles Alexander, represented by attorney, Mr. James R. Greiner, hereby agree and stipulate that the current date set for the status conference, Thursday, July 5, 2012, is and can be vacated by the Court and can be rescheduled for Thursday, August 30, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. in Courtroom #7, on the 14th Floor, before the Honorable United States District Court, Judge Morrison C. England, Jr..
The Court's courtroom deputy, Ms. Stephanie Deutsch, was contacted to ensure the Court was available and the Court is available on Thursday, August 30, 2012.
Further, all of the parties, the United States of America and both defendants agree and stipulate that time under the Speedy Trial Act can be excluded under Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), corresponding Local Code T-4, which corresponds to Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(A) (to allow counsel time to prepare) from Thursday, July 5, 2012 to through and including, Thursday, August 30, 2012.
STATUS OF DISCOVERY
Counsel for defendant Charles Alexander has just been appointed to this case and needs reasonable time to review the discovery in this case, to meet with the client and review the discovery in this case. The time requested, in exercising due diligence, is reasonably necessary to allow defense counsel time to review the discovery and meet and confer with the client about both the facts of the case and the discovery.
In addition, the case could potentially have complex legal issues regarding the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines, including but not limited to the criminal history of the defendants, which needs to have investigation done, legal research done and discussions with the client so that the client is fully informed on the potential issues regarding the potential issues regarding the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines. In as much as the potential Advisory Sentencing Guideline issues are complex regarding the criminal history, in the exercise of reasonable diligence by counsel, the time requested is reasonable in this case.
EXCLUSION OF TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
The parties agree and stipulate that with new counsel just being appointed to represent defendant Charles Alexander, the need for counsel to review the discovery in this case and to meet and confer with the client regarding the discovery and the facts of this case and the potential complex issues regarding the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines, the interests of justice in granting this reasonable request for a continuance outweighs both the public's right to a speedy trial and each defendant's individual right and the defendant's joint right to a speedy trial in this case, pursuant to Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), corresponding to Local Code T-4, which corresponds to Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(A) (to allow counsel time to prepare) from Thursday, July 5, 2012 to through and including Thursday, August 30, 2012.
The respective parties have authorized James R. Greiner to sign this stipulation.
Respectfully submitted,
BENJAMIN WAGNER
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
_________________
Daniel S. McConkie, Jr.
ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF
_________________
Michael B. Bigelow
Attorney for defendant
Jusstanene King
_________________
James R. Greiner
Attorney for Defendant
Charles Alexander
ORDER
Based upon the representations of counsel, the record in this case, and the agreements and stipulations between all counsel in the case, the Court makes the following findings:
The Court finds that the ends of justice in this case in granting this continuance outweigh both the public's right and each defendant's individual right and the defendant's joint right to a speedy trial in this case;
The Court finds that the record in this case and the case itself supports a finding that time shall be excluded under local code T-4, which corresponds to Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(A). Time is to be excluded for the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation by defense counsel and Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and section 3161(h)(7)(A), of the speedy trial act. Counsel for all parties stipulate that the ends of justice are served by the Court excluding such time, so that counsel for the defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, for reviewing the discovery in this case, for discussing with the respective clients the discovery and the facts of the case, and for the investigation and legal research needed to be done on the potential complex issues regarding the Advisory Sentencing Guidelines regarding any potential sentence, including but not limited to the criminal history of the defendants, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), and therefore time should be excluded under 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, which corresponds to Title 18 section 3161(h)(7)(A).
The Status Conference currently set for Thursday, July 5, 2012, is vacated, and the new Status Conference is set for Thursday, August 30, 2012, with time excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from Thursday, July 5, 2012, through to and including Thursday, August 30, 2012, for the reasons agreed to and stipulated by the parties and as stated herein.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_________________
MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE