From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Rosales

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
May 29, 2013
CR13-00224-EJD (N.D. Cal. May. 29, 2013)

Opinion

          MICHELLE D. SPENCER, CBN 164696, LAW OFFICE OF MICHELLE D. SPENCER, Santa Cruz, CA, Attorney for Javier Martinez Montecinos Rosales.

          MELINDA HAAG, United States Attorney, GARY FRY, Assistant United States Attorney, THOMAS J. FERRITO, Counsel for Victor Cernas.


          STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE TO JULY 1, 2013 AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

          EDWARD J. DAVILA, District Judge.

         The parties, by and through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate, subject to the Court's approval, that the status conference currently scheduled for June 3, 2013 be continued to July 1, 2013 for further status.

         The parties further stipulate that time should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from June 3, 2013 through and including July 1, 2013 for effective preparation of defense counsel. Additional discovery is expected to be distributed to the defense soon. Counsel will need time to review it and conduct any necessary investigation.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

         [PROPOSED] ORDER

         GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, and upon the stipulation of the parties,

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference currently scheduled for both defendants on June 3, 2013 shall be continued to July 1, 2013 at 1:30 p.m. for further status.

         FURTHER, the Court finds that failing to exclude the time between June 3, 2013 through and including July 1, 2013, would unreasonably deny defense counsel time for effective preparation pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). The ends of justice served by excluding the time between June 3, 2013 and July 1, 2013, from computation under the Speedy Trial Act outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time between June 3, 2013 through and including July 1, 2013, shall be excluded from computation under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), and (B)(iv), and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1)(D).

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Rosales

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division
May 29, 2013
CR13-00224-EJD (N.D. Cal. May. 29, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Rosales

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JAVIER MARTINEZ MONTECINOS ROSALES…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, N.D. California, San Jose Division

Date published: May 29, 2013

Citations

CR13-00224-EJD (N.D. Cal. May. 29, 2013)