From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Daleman

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Sep 8, 2015
1:11-CR-00385 AWI-BAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2015)

Opinion

          MARC DAYS, Days Law Firm, Fresno, CA., Attorneys for Defendant, RICHARD DALEMAN.

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, KATHLEEN SERVATIUS, Assistant United States Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff.


          STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE; ORDER THEREON

          BARBARA A. McAULIFFE, Magistrate Judge.

         IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties, through their respective counsel, Assistant United States Attorney, Kathleen Servatius, Counsel for Plaintiff, Assistant Federal Defender, Marc Days, Counsel for Defendant, Richard Daleman, that the status conference hearing currently set for October 13, 2014, at 1:00 p.m., may be rescheduled to November 9, 2015, at 1:00 p.m.

         1. By previous order, this matter was set for a status conference hearing on October 13, 2015, at 1:00pm.

         2. By this stipulation, the parties move to continue the status hearing to November 9, 2015, at 1:00 p.m., and to exclude time between October 13, 2015, and November 9, 2015 under 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(1)(E) and (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

         3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following:

         a. The Court is unavailable on the date previously set by the parties - October

         b. Additional time is needed for defense investigation and preparation, plea negotiations, and a ruling by the 9th Circuit on related issues.

         c. The parties have agreed to continue the date for the status conference to November 9, 2015;

         d. For the purposes of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. §3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of October 13, 2015, to November 9, 2015, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(1)(E) and (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) because the ends of justice is served by granting the continuance and outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, assures continuity of counsel, and gives the defense and government a reasonable time for effective preparation exercising due diligence.

         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.

          ORDER

         IT IS SO ORDERED. For the reasons set forth above, that the 11th Status Conference is continued from October 13, 2015 to November 9, 2015 at 1:00 PM before Judge McAuliffe. Time is excluded 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(1)(E) and (h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Daleman

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Sep 8, 2015
1:11-CR-00385 AWI-BAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Daleman

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD DALEMAN, Defendant.

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

Date published: Sep 8, 2015

Citations

1:11-CR-00385 AWI-BAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 8, 2015)