Opinion
Case No. CR 3:13-MJ-70511-JCS
05-09-2013
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Griffith Defendant.
STIPULATED ORDER EXCLUDING TIME
UNDER THE SPEEDY ____
For the reasons stated by the parties on the record on May 9, 2013, the Court exc1udes time under the Speedy Trial Act from May 9, 2013 to May 31, 2013 and finds that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public1 and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court makes this finding and bases this continuance on the following factor(s):
____ Failure to grant a continuance would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(i). ____ The case is so unusual or so complex, due to [check applicable reasons] ____ the number of defendants, x the nature of the prosecution, or x the existence of novel questions of fact or law, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or the trial itself within the time limits established by this section. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii). ____ Failure to grant a continuance would deny the defendant reasonable time to obtain counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). ____ Failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel, given counsel's other scheduled case commitments, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). v Failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
IT IS SO ORDERED.
__________________________
JOSEPH C. SPERO
United States Magistrate Judge
STIPULATED: __________________________
Attorney for Defendant
__________________________
Assistant United States Attorney