From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Nilsen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Oct 7, 2011
No. CR 09-00895 EJD (N.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2011)

Opinion

No. CR 09-00895 EJD

10-07-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID ARTHUR NILSEN, Defendant.

MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney JONATHAN SCHMIDT Assistant United States Attorney LEO PATRICK CUNNINGHAM Attorney for Defendant


MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)

United States Attorney

MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630)

Chief, Criminal Division

JONATHAN SCHMIDT (CABN 230646)

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorneys for Plaintiff

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

CONTINUING HEARING DATE

This case is set for a dispositional hearing on October 11, 2011, and a pre-trial conference on October 24, 2011. The parties have reached a plea agreement in principle and are working out the details. The parties anticipated having the details worked-out by October 11, 2011. Because of the complexity of the case the parties need a few more weeks to work out these details.

Accordingly the parties request that the Court vacate the October 11, 2011, hearing and set October 24, 2011 for a change of plea. The parties also stipulate that failure to grant this continuance would deny the parties reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The parties request that the period from October 11, 2011, and October 24, 2011, be excluded in computing the time within which the trial must commence, pursuant to U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). SO STIPULATED

MELINDA HAAG

United States Attorney

JONATHAN SCHMIDT

Assistant United States Attorney

LEO PATRICK CUNNINGHAM

Attorney for Defendant

[PROPOSED] ORDER

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, and per the parties' stipulation, the October 11, 2011, hearing is vacated and the October 24, 2011, hearing date is set for a change of pleas. The period from October 11, 2011 and October 24, 2011 be excluded in computing the time within which an the trial must commence, pursuant to U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED

EDWARD J. DAVILA

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Nilsen

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Oct 7, 2011
No. CR 09-00895 EJD (N.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Nilsen

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID ARTHUR NILSEN, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Oct 7, 2011

Citations

No. CR 09-00895 EJD (N.D. Cal. Oct. 7, 2011)