From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. McFarling

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 9, 2011
1:10-cr-00386-OWW (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)

Opinion

1:10-cr-00386-OWW

09-09-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL SHANE MCFARLING, Defendant.

Jeremy R. Jehangiri Assistant United States Attorney Victor M. Chavez Attorney for Defendant, Michael Shane McFarling


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

JEREMY R. JEHANGIRI

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Plaintiff

United States of America

STIPULATION AND AGREEMENT TO CONTINUE TRIAL CONFIRMATION AND

MOTIONS IN LIMINE HEARINGS; ORDER

Honorable Oliver W. Wanger

The United States of America, by and through Assistant United States Attorney Jeremy R. Jehangiri, and Defendant Michael Shane McFarling, by and through his counsel, Victor M. Chavez, submit this stipulation for the Court's consideration.

IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED:

1. Pursuant to this Court's order that the jury trial date in this case be continued from September 27, 2011, to December 6, 2011, at 9:00 a.m., and pursuant to the parties stipulation that the ends of justice are served by the Court excluding such time, so that counsel for the United States and the defendant may have reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv), the parties further request that the Trial Confirmation and Motions in Limine Hearings be likewise continued to November 21, 2011, at 9:00 a.m.

2. The parties stipulate and agree that their respective motions in limine shall be due on or before November 11, 2011. Any responses to such motions in limine shall be due on or before November 16, 2011.

3. 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 trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

4. The parties are also engaged in extensive plea negotiations, and this case may be resolved without a trial. The parties stipulate that further discussions relating to a plea agreement and additional time to engage in such plea negotiations would allow for effective representation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and for efficient use of the Court's time and resources.

SO STIPULATED AND AGREED.

Jeremy R. Jehangiri

Assistant United States Attorney

Victor M. Chavez

Attorney for Defendant,

Michael Shane McFarling

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Oliver W. Wanger

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. McFarling

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 9, 2011
1:10-cr-00386-OWW (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. McFarling

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL SHANE MCFARLING, Defendant.

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

Date published: Sep 9, 2011

Citations

1:10-cr-00386-OWW (E.D. Cal. Sep. 9, 2011)