From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Hidalgo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 5, 2012
No. 1:11-CR-00359 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2012)

Opinion

No. 1:11-CR-00359 LJO

01-05-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ISRAEL HIDALGO, Defendant.

DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender RACHEL W. HILL, Bar #151522 Assistant Federal Defender Designated Counsel for Service Attorney for Defendant ISRAEL HIDALGO


DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

RACHEL W. HILL, Bar #151522

Assistant Federal Defender

Designated Counsel for Service

Attorney for Defendant

ISRAEL HIDALGO

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE HEARING; ORDER


Date : February 13, 2012

Time: 1:00 P.M.

Judge: Hon. Lawrence J. O'Neill

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto, and through their respective attorneys of record herein, that the status conference in the above-entitled matter scheduled for January 9, 2012, may be continued to February 13, 2012, at 1:00 P.M.

This continuance is requested by counsel for the defendant. The defense has requested from the government additional discovery which may impact any proposed plea agreement and/or sentencing issues. The government has requested the sought-after discovery from outside agencies, including the Mexican Consulate in Mazatlan. The requested continuance should provide sufficient time for the information to be received by the government and forwarded to the defense. Counsel will then need time to review and discuss the discovery with client, who is presently housed at the Lerdo Detention Facility, before any productive hearing can be had. AUSA Michele Thielhorn has no objection to this request. The requested continuance will conserve time and resources for both counsel and the court.

The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded in the interests of justice, including but not limited to, the need for the period of time set forth herein for further defense preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B).

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

____________________

MICHELE THIELHORN

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Plaintiff

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

_________________

RACHEL W. HILL

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

ISRAEL HIDALGO

ORDER

For the reasons set forth above, the continuance requested is granted for good cause and the Court finds the interest of justice outweighs the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Hidalgo

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 5, 2012
No. 1:11-CR-00359 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Hidalgo

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ISRAEL HIDALGO, Defendant.

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

Date published: Jan 5, 2012

Citations

No. 1:11-CR-00359 LJO (E.D. Cal. Jan. 5, 2012)