Opinion
2:19-C1-00121 CDS BNW
08-04-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN, Defendant.
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY EDWARD VERONDA Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THE SAFFARI LAW FIRM NINAZ SAFFARI Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN THE KUYUMJIAN FIRM, APC HAGOP KUYUMJIAN Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN HENDRON LAW GROUP, LLC LANCE J. HENDRON Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN Ninaz Saffari CA SBN 235811 (admitted pro hac vice) THE SAFFARI LAW FIRM Hagop Kuyumjian CA SBN 259995 (admitted pro hac vice) THE KUYUMJIAN FIRM, APC Lance J. Hendron NV SBN 11151 (local counsel) HENDRON LAW GROUP, LLC Attorneys for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY EDWARD VERONDA Attorney for Plaintiff UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
THE SAFFARI LAW FIRM NINAZ SAFFARI Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN
THE KUYUMJIAN FIRM, APC HAGOP KUYUMJIAN Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN
HENDRON LAW GROUP, LLC LANCE J. HENDRON Attorney for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN
Ninaz Saffari CA SBN 235811 (admitted pro hac vice) THE SAFFARI LAW FIRM
Hagop Kuyumjian CA SBN 259995 (admitted pro hac vice) THE KUYUMJIAN FIRM, APC
Lance J. Hendron NV SBN 11151 (local counsel) HENDRON LAW GROUP, LLC
Attorneys for Defendant AARON LEWIS MCLAUGHLIN
STIPULATION TO CONTINUE PLEA HEARING
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its cotmsel of record, the United States Attorney for the District of Nevada and Assistant United States Attorney Edward Veronda, and Defendant 1 Counsel are reminded, pursuant to ECF No. 36, this case is assigned to Judge Cristina D. Silva. All documents must bear the correct Aaron Lewis McLaughlin (“Defendant”), by and through his counsel of record, Ninaz Saffari, Hagop Kuyumjian, and Lance J. Hendron (“Defense Counsel”), that the plea hearing set for August 22, 2022 at 9:30 a.m., be vacated and continued to August 25, 2022, August 26, 2022, or a date and time convenient with the Court and parties.
IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED, that a signed plea agreement has been submitted in this matter.
1. Ninaz Saffari and Hagop Kuyumjian (“Los Angeles Defense Counsel”) substituted into this case in June 2021.
2. The additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay, but to allow Los Angeles Defense Counsel sufficient time within which to be able to appear in Nevada District Court for the change of plea hearing.
3. The Defendant is not incarcerated and does not object to a continuance.
4. Defendant believes that failure to grant the continuance will deny him continuity of counsel and adequate representation.
5. The parties agree to the continuance.
6. The parties make this stipulation in good faith and not for the purposes of unnecessary delay.
7. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice. The additional time requested by this Stipulation is excludable in computing the time within which the trial herein must commence pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7)(A), considering the factors under Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv).
This is the six stipulation to continue filed and the second stipulation to continue since the execution of the plea agreement.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the pending Stipulation of counsel, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court finds that:
1. The parties have executed a plea agreement. The parties are seeking time to schedule a change of plea hearing.
2. Ninaz Saffari, Hagop Kuyumjian, and Lance J. Hendron (“Defense Counsel”) currently represent Defendant Aaron Lewis McLaughlin (“Defendant”).
3. Ninaz Saffari and Hagop Kuyumjian (“Los Angeles Defense Counsel”) substituted into this case in June 2021.
4. Ninaz Saffari and Hagop Kuyumjian (“Los Angeles Defense Counsel”) substituted into this case in June 2021.
5. The additional time requested herein is not sought for purposes of delay, but to allow Los Angeles Defense Counsel sufficient time within which to be able to appear in Nevada District Court for the change of plea hearing.
6. The Defendant is not incarcerated and does not object to a continuance.
7. Defendant believes that failure to grant the continuance will deny him continuity of counsel and adequate representation.
8. The parties agree to the continuance.
9. The parties make this stipulation in good faith and not for the purposes of unnecessary delay.
10. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice. The additional time requested by this Stipulation is excludable in computing the time within which the trial herein must commence pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7)(A), considering the factors under Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv).
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The ends of justice served by granting said continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, since the failure to grant said continuance would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice, would deny the parties herein sufficient time and the opportunity within which to be able to effectively and thoroughly prepare for trial, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
The continuance sought herein is excusable under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18, United States Code, Section § 3161 (h)(7)(A), when the considering the factors under Title 18, United States Code, § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), (iv).
ORDER
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the plea hearing scheduled for August 22, 2022, at the hour of 9:30 a.in., be vacated and continued to August 25,2022 at the hour of 1: 30 P m.