Opinion
NO. 1:11-cr-00230 LJO
07-13-2012
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LARRY ESCOBEDO, Defendant.
DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender ERIC V. KERSTEN, Bar #226429 Assistant Federal Defender Designated Counsel for Service Attorney for Defendant Larry Escobedo
DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424
Federal Defender
ERIC V. KERSTEN, Bar #226429
Assistant Federal Defender
Designated Counsel for Service
Attorney for Defendant
Larry Escobedo
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING
HEARING AND ORDER
Judge: Hon. Lawrence J. O'Neill
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, KIMBERLY A. SANCHEZ, Assistant United States Attorney, and ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for Defendant Larry Escobedo, that the date for sentencing may be continued to July 30, 2012, or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the court. The date currently set for sentencing is July 23, 2012. The requested new date is July 30, 2012.
The defendant's sentencing memorandum is due on July 16, 2012. The defense is requesting that sentencing be continued for one week because Mr. Escobedo is housed in the Kern County/Lerdo Detention Facility and counsel needs additional time to review the sentencing memorandum with Mr. Escobedo prior to filing. The government does not object to the requested continuance.
The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded as necessary for effective defense preparation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). For this reason, the ends of justice served by the granting of the requested continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.
BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
United States Attorney
By ____________________________
KIMBERLY A. SANCHEZ
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorney for Plaintiff
DANIEL J. BRODERICK
Federal Defender
By ____________________________
ERIC V. KERSTEN
Assistant Federal Defender
Attorney for Defendant
Larry Escobedo
ORDER
IT IS SO ORDERED. The intervening period of delay is excluded in the interests of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Lawrence J. O'Neill
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE