From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Kirby

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 1, 2011
NO. 11-mj-171 KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 1, 2011)

Opinion

NO. 11-mj-171 KJN

09-01-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BOBBY JOE KIRBY, Defendant.

DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424 Federal Defender MATTHEW C. BOCKMON, Bar # 161566 Assistant Federal Defender Designated Counsel for Service Attorney for Defendant BOBBY JOE KIRBY


DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

MATTHEW C. BOCKMON, Bar # 161566

Assistant Federal Defender

Designated Counsel for Service

Attorney for Defendant

BOBBY JOE KIRBY

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO EXTEND TIME FOR PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION AND TO EXCLUDE TIME

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED TO between the United States of America through Matthew D. Segal, Assistant United States Attorney, and BOBBY JOE KIRBY, by and through his counsel, Matthew C. Bockmon, Assistant Federal Defender, that the Preliminary Examination set for Thursday, September 1, 2011, may be continued to Wednesday, September 21, 2011, at 2:00 p.m., before Magistrate Judge Gregory G. Hollows.

The parties stipulate that the time between the filing of this stipulation, September 1, 2011, through and including September 21, 2011, should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act and that there is good cause for a continuance of the preliminary examination pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 5.1(d). The parties 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. 18U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). Specifically, additional time is appropriate for attorney-client consultation in this case because the defendant lives in Reno. 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 return of an indictment and speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A); 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b).

For good cause shown above,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Respectfully submitted,

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

MATTHEW C. BOCKMON

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

BOBBY JOE KIRBY

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

MATTHEW D. SEGAL

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorney for Plaintiff

ORDER

DALE A. DROZD

United States Magistrate Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Kirby

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 1, 2011
NO. 11-mj-171 KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 1, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Kirby

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BOBBY JOE KIRBY, Defendant.

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

Date published: Sep 1, 2011

Citations

NO. 11-mj-171 KJN (E.D. Cal. Sep. 1, 2011)