From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Le

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 28, 2011
No. CR-S-10-443 JAM (E.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2011)

Opinion

No. CR-S-10-443 JAM

10-28-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. VI A. LE, et al., Defendants.

JOHN R. MANNING Attorney for Defendant Vi A. Le DOUGLAS J. BEEVERS Attorney for Defendant Tony Sek Mun OLAF W. HEDBERG Attorney for Defendant Dong Ping Huang Benjamin B. Wagner United States Attorney by: TODD D. LERAS Assistant U.S. Attorney


JOHN R. MANNING (SBN 220874)

ATTORNEY AT LAW

Attorney for Defendant

VI A. LE

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE

Judge: Honorable John A. Mendez

IT IS HEREBY stipulated between the United States of America through its undersigned counsel, Todd D. Leras, Assistant United States Attorney, together with counsel for defendant Vi A. Le, John R. Manning, Esq., counsel for defendant Tony Sek Mun, Douglas J. Beevers, Esq., and counsel for defendant Dong Ping Huang, Olaf W. Hedberg, Esq., that the status conference presently set for November 1, 2011 be continued to January 17, 2012, at 9:30 a.m., thus vacating the presently set status conference.

The defendants speak Cantonese and require the services of an interpreter in order to communicate effectively with counsel. The Government has provided counsel for the defendants a preliminary framework intended to serve as the basis of future written plea agreements in this matter. Counsels for the defendants need additional time to meet with the defendants (with the interpreter) in order to review the discovery; investigations reports; and, discuss USSG calculations. Counsel for the defendants believes this continuance is necessary in order to effectively communicate the terms of any proposed settlement; its consequences; and, to answer questions by the defendants on how to proceed.

Therefore, counsel for the parties stipulate and agree that the interests of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the defendants and the public in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A) (continuity of counsel/ reasonable time for effective preparation) and Local Code T4, and agree to exclude time from the date of the filing of the order until the date of the status conference, January 17, 2012.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

JOHN R. MANNING

Attorney for Defendant

Vi A. Le

DOUGLAS J. BEEVERS

Attorney for Defendant

Tony Sek Mun

OLAF W. HEDBERG

Attorney for Defendant

Dong Ping Huang

Benjamin B. Wagner

United States Attorney

by: TODD D. LERAS

Assistant U.S. Attorney

JOHN R. MANNING (SBN 220874)

ATTORNEY AT LAW

1111 H Street, # 204

Sacramento, CA. 95814

(916) 444-3994

Fax (916) 447-0931

imanninglaw@yahoo.com

Attorney for Defendant

VI A. LE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,

v.

VI A. LE, et al., Defendants.

No. CR-S-10-0443 JAM


ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERNCE

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that the November 1, 2011 status conference be continued to January 17, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. I find that the ends of justice warrant an exclusion of time and that the defendant's need for continuity of counsel and reasonable time for effective preparation exceeds the public interest in a trial within 70 days. THEREFORE IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that time be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A) and Local Code T4 from the date of this order to January 17, 2012.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

John A. Mendez

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Le

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Oct 28, 2011
No. CR-S-10-443 JAM (E.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Le

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. VI A. LE, et al., Defendants.

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

Date published: Oct 28, 2011

Citations

No. CR-S-10-443 JAM (E.D. Cal. Oct. 28, 2011)