From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Andraca-Cardenas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
No. CR 11-0298 RS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)

Opinion

No. CR 11-0298 RS

11-08-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GILBERTO ANDRACA-CARDENAS, Defendant.

MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney SUSAN PHAN Special Assistant U.S. Attorney STEVEN KALAR Attorney for GILBERTO ANDRACA-CARDENAS


MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)

United States Attorney

MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630)

Chief, Criminal Division

SUSAN PHAN (CABN 241637) Special Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for the Plaintiffs

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3161

The defendant appeared for a status conference before this Court on October 25, 2011. The parties requested that this matter be continued to December 13, 2011. The defendant needs time to review the additional discovery that was provided by the Government. There were no objections. The parties have agreed to exclude the period of time between October 25, 2011 to December 13, 2011, from any time limits applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The parties represented that granting the exclusion would allow the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation and continuity of counsel. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The parties also agree that good cause exists, and that the ends of justice served by granting such an exclusion of time outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). At the hearing, the Court made findings consistent with this agreement.

SO STIPULATED:

MELINDA HAAG

United States Attorney

SUSAN PHAN

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

STEVEN KALAR

Attorney for GILBERTO ANDRACA-CARDENAS

[PROPOSED] ORDER

For the reasons stated above at the October 25, 2011 status conference, the Court finds that the exclusion from the time limits applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 of the period from October 25 to December 13, 2011 is warranted and that good cause exists, and the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A).

RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Judge

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Andraca-Cardenas

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Nov 8, 2011
No. CR 11-0298 RS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Andraca-Cardenas

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GILBERTO ANDRACA-CARDENAS…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Nov 8, 2011

Citations

No. CR 11-0298 RS (N.D. Cal. Nov. 8, 2011)