From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Leonte

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 25, 2011
NO 2:08-cr-00468-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2011)

Opinion

NO 2:08-cr-00468-KJM

08-25-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. FABIAN LEONTE, et al., DEFENDANTS.

Krista Hart Attorney for Defendant Maria Santa John Balazs Attorney for Defendant Virgil Santa Jeffrey Staniels Attorney for Defendant Candit Sava, Jr. James R. Greiner Attorney for Defendant Fabian Leonte


JAMES R. GREINER, ESQ,

CALIFORNIA STATE BARNUMBER 123357

LAW OFFICES OF JAMES R. GREINER

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT

FABIAN LEONTE

STIPULATION AND ORDER


PARTIES TO THE LITIGATION

The parties to this litigation, the Unites States of America, represented by Assistant United States Attorney, Ms. Dominique Thomas , and the defendants (hereinafter referred to as the defendants): 1) Maria Santa, represented by her attorney, Ms. Krista Hart; 2) Virgil Santa, represented by his attorney, Mr. John Balazs; 3) Candit Sava, Jr., represented by his attorney, Mr. Jeffrey Staniels; and 4) Fabian Leonte, represented by his attorney, Mr. James R. Greiner, hereby agree and stipulate to the following:

The presently scheduled Trial Confirmation Hearing, scheduled for Thursday, September 29, 2011 and presently scheduled Trial, scheduled for Monday, October 17, 2011, can be vacated by the Court.

The parties agree to the following motion schedule dates:

Defense Motions to be filed on or before October 13, 2011

Government's oppositions to be filed on or before November 10, 2011

Defense Reply to government's oppositions on or before December 1, 2011

Court Hearing December 15, 2011

TIME EXCLUDED UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

The parties to this Stipulation agree and stipulate that the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the public's right and all of the defendants' right to a speedy trial in this case. That finding is supported by the factual bases and findings which are: 1- this is a multi-defendant case; 2-the allegations are complex, both legally and factually, as stated in the superceding Indictment which include: Nine (9) counts of mail fraud; Four (4) counts of false statements on loan applications: Identity Theft; Aggravated Identity Theft Identity Theft, and Five (5) counts of Engaging in Monetary transactions over $10,000 in property derived from specified unlawful activity; 3- a co-defendant has pled guilty, with a co-operation agreement with the government, requiring additional defense investigation; 4- filing of defense motions and; 5- the legal issues in this case are complex.

The parties agree and stipulate that with all parties exercising reasonable diligence the need for this continuance will allow both continuity of counsel and defense counsel adequate time to prepare and to investigate and allow adequate time for defense counsel to file motions within the meaning of Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local code T-4, and all the parties agree to and stipulate to the exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act from the date of this order to and including December 15, 2011, the date set for a hearing. In addition, the parties agree and stipulate that upon the filing of any motion, the speedy trial act stops pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(1)(D) and Local Code E, to and including the hearing date of Thursday, December 15, 2011.

Respectfully submitted:

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

Dominique Thomas, by e mail authorization

Dominique Thomas

ASSISTANT UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

ATTORNEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF

Krista Hart, by e mail authorization

Krista Hart

Attorney for Defendant

Maria Santa

John Balazs, by e mail authorization

John Balazs

Attorney for Defendant

Virgil Santa

Jeffrey Staniels, by e mail authorization

Jeffrey Staniels

Attorney for Defendant

Candit Sava, Jr.

James R. Greiner

James R. Greiner

Attorney for Defendant

Fabian Leonte

ORDER

The court, having received, read, and considered the agreement and stipulation of the parties, having reviewed the record in this case and having reviewed the docket in this case makes the following findings and order:

This court finds that, in this case, the ends of justice are served by granting this continuance and outweigh the best interests of the public and all the defendants in a speedy trial in this case.

This court makes the following specific findings in this case which supports the finding to grant this continuance:

1- this is a multi-defendant case;
2- the allegations are complex, both legally and factually as stated in the superceding Indictment which include: Nine (9) counts of mail fraud; Four (4) counts of false statements on loan applications: Identity Theft; Aggravated Identity Theft Identity Theft, and Five (5) counts of Engaging in Monetary transactions over $10,000 in property derived from specified unlawful activity;
3- a co-defendant has pled guilty, with a co-operation agreement with the government, requiring additional defense investigation;
4- filing of defense motions and;
5- the legal issues in this case are complex.

The Court specifically finds that even in the exercise of reasonable diligence by all parties that, in this case, it is unreasonable to expect the case to go to trial within the time limits of the Speedy Trial Act, and that pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(1)(7)(A) this Court finds that the ends of justice are served by granting this continuance taking into consideration that all parties, in exercising reasonable diligence in the preparation of this case, the need for this continuance will allow both continuity of counsel and defense counsel adequate time to prepare and investigate and allow adequate time for defense counsel to file motions within the meaning of Title 18 U.S.C. section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local code T-4.

Further, this Court finds that the time from the date this Order is signed to and including Thursday, December 15, 2011, shall be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act for all of the reasons stated herein, and stated by the parties agreement and Stipulation. Further, the Court finds that upon the filing of any motion in this case the Speedy Trial Act stops pursuant to Title 18 U.S.C. section (h)(1)(D) and Local Code E to and including the hearing date of Thursday, December 15, 2011.

This Court adopts the agreement and Stipulation of the parties and the following briefing schedule:

Defense Motions to be filed on or before October 13, 2011

Government's oppositions to be filed on or before November 10, 2011

Defense Reply to government's oppositions on or before December 1, 2011 Court Hearing December 15, 2011

FOR ALL THE REASONS STATED HEREIN, THE COURT FINDS GOOD CAUSE AND GRANTS THE REQUEST OF THE PARTIES,

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_________________________

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Leonte

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 25, 2011
NO 2:08-cr-00468-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Leonte

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF, v. FABIAN LEONTE, et al., DEFENDANTS.

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

Date published: Aug 25, 2011

Citations

NO 2:08-cr-00468-KJM (E.D. Cal. Aug. 25, 2011)