From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Cassady

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 2, 2011
Case No. 2:11-cr-00044-JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 2:11-cr-00044-JAM

09-02-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DUSTIN CASSADY, Defendant.

William J. Portanova Attorney at Law Matthew G. Morris Assistant United States Attorney


WILLLIAM J. PORTANOVA, State Bar No. 106193

Attorney at Law

Attorney for Dustin Cassady

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING THE STATUS

HEARING AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

Date: September 6, 2011

Time: 9:30 a.m.

Dept: The Hon. John A. Mendez

With the Court's permission, it is hereby stipulated between the parties, William J. Portanova, counsel for the defendant herein, and Matthew Morris, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for the plaintiff, that the status hearing scheduled for September 6, 2011 at 9:30 a.m. be continued until the 25th of October, 2011 at 9:30 a.m.

In addition, the parties stipulate that the time between September 6, 2011 and October 25, 2011 be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act (18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)) and local code T4 to give counsel time to prepare.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

William J. Portanova

Attorney at Law

Matthew G. Morris

Assistant United States Attorney

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,

v.

DUSTIN CASSADY, Defendant.

Case No. 2:11-cr-00044-JAM

ORDER CONTINUING THE STATUS CONFERENCE HEARING AND

EXCLUDING TIME PURSUANT TO THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

For the reasons set forth in the stipulation of the parties filed on September 2, 2011, and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status hearing set for September 6, 2011, be vacated and that the case be set for a status conference on October 25, 2011, at 9:30 a.m.

The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by the continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Accordingly it is ORDERED that, for 25, 2011, be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), and local code T4, due to the need to provide defense counsel with reasonable time to prepare.

JOHN A. MENDEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Cassady

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 2, 2011
Case No. 2:11-cr-00044-JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Cassady

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DUSTIN CASSADY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Sep 2, 2011

Citations

Case No. 2:11-cr-00044-JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 2, 2011)