From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Liebman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 18, 2011
CASE NO. 2:10-cr-00452-GEB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO. 2:10-cr-00452-GEB

09-18-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SAMUEL LIEBMAN Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney By: MATTHEW G. MORRIS Assistant U.S. Attorney DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender LEXI NEGIN Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Samuel Liebman


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

MATTHEW G. MORRIS

Assistant U.S. Attorney

STIPULATION AND ORDER

The parties, by and through counsel, hereby stipulate as follows:

1. This case is currently set for jury trial beginning September 27, 2011 and estimated to last five days.

2. The parties are exploring the possibility of referring the case for pretrial diversion and a deferred prosecution agreement.

3. The Pretrial Services Office has informed the parties that it will take between two and four weeks to evaluate the referral and determine whether that office can accommodate the supervision that such a proposed agreement would entail.

4. In light of the above, the parties jointly request that the Court vacate the jury trial scheduled for September 27, 2011, as well as all remaining filing deadlines established at the trial confirmation hearing.

5. The parties request that the Court set this case for a status hearing on October 21, 2011, and represent that they are optimistic that they will be prepared to enter into a deferred prosecution agreement at that hearing.

6. The Court previously excluded time up to and including September 27, 2011, under the Speedy Trial Act for the purposes of defense preparation. The parties stipulate that the period from the date of this order through October 21, 2011, should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and local code T4, because the time will be used to prepare, respond to, and finalize the details of the agreement. The parties represent that the ends of justice to be served by this continuance outweigh the interest of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By: MATTHEW G. MORRIS

Assistant U.S. Attorney

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

(auth. by phone 9/15/11)

By: LEXI NEGIN

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Samuel Liebman

IT IS SO ORDERED.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Liebman

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 18, 2011
CASE NO. 2:10-cr-00452-GEB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Liebman

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SAMUEL LIEBMAN Defendant.

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

Date published: Sep 18, 2011

Citations

CASE NO. 2:10-cr-00452-GEB (E.D. Cal. Sep. 18, 2011)