From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Navarro

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 12, 2012
CASE NO. 11-252 JAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2012)

Opinion

CASE NO. 11-252 JAM

01-12-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN NAVARRO, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DANIEL S. McCONKIE Assistant U.S. Attorney


BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

DANIEL S. McCONKIE

Assistant U.S. Attorney

STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE

The parties request that the status conference currently set for Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 9:30 a.m., be continued to Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 9:30 a.m., and stipulate that the period of time between and including those dates should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. § 3161.

The parties are still actively involved in pre-trial negotiations and discussing possible resolutions. Both sides continue to conduct additional investigation and prepare for trial.

Accordingly, the parties believe that the continuance should be excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. The additional time is necessary to ensure effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4. 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).

Respectfully Submitted,

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

_________________

DANIEL S. McCONKIE

By: Assistant U.S. Attorney

________________

By: John Virga

Attorney for the Defendant

by telephonic authorization

ORDER

The status conference currently set for Tuesday, January 17, 2012 at 9:30 a.m. is continued to Tuesday, February 21, 2012 at 9:30 a.m., and the time period between and including those dates is excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161 and Local Code T4. The Court finds 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).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

JOHN A. MENDEZ

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Navarro

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 12, 2012
CASE NO. 11-252 JAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Navarro

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. STEVEN NAVARRO, Defendant.

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

Date published: Jan 12, 2012

Citations

CASE NO. 11-252 JAM (E.D. Cal. Jan. 12, 2012)