From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Havens

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 17, 2011
CASE NO.1:11-cr-00250-LJO (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO.1:11-cr-00250-LJO

10-17-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. TONY HUY HAVENS, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney MARK J. McKEON Assistant U.S. Attorney ANN VORIS Attorney for Defendant


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

MARK J. McKEON

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorneys for the

United States of America

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO EXCLUDE TIME

The parties request that the status conference in this case be continued from November 21, 2011 to December 5, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. They stipulate that the time between November 21, 2011 and December 5, 2011 should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act.

In addition, the parties request that the schedule for the filing and briefing of pretrial motions be amended as follows:

+-----------------------------------+ ¦OLD DATE ¦NEW DATE ¦ +-----------------+-----------------¦ ¦October 21, 2011 ¦October 31, 2011 ¦ +-----------------+-----------------¦ ¦November 11, 2011¦November 28, 2011¦ +-----------------------------------+

The parties request this continuance because counsel for the government will be out of the district on November 21, 2011. Therefore, time may be excluded under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) because a failure to continue the hearing would deny the Government continuity of counsel. The parties further stipulate that the ends of justice are served by the Court excluding such time, so that counsel for the defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Specifically, counsel for the defendant needs additional time to determine whether any motions are appropriate for this case. The parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

Respectfully Submitted,

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

MARK J. McKEON

Assistant U.S. Attorney

ANN VORIS

Attorney for Defendant
IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Havens

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 17, 2011
CASE NO.1:11-cr-00250-LJO (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Havens

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. TONY HUY HAVENS, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Oct 17, 2011

Citations

CASE NO.1:11-cr-00250-LJO (E.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2011)