Opinion
Case No: 08-474 EJG
08-31-2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DINO ROSETTI, and BEHROOZ BADIE, Defendants.
Mark Reichel Attorney for Defendant Dino Rosetti Patrick K. Hanly Attorney for Defendant Behrooz Badie Philip A. Ferrari Assistant United States Attorney
Patrick K. Hanly (SBN 128521)
Attorney for Defendant
Behrooz Badie
STIPULATION AND ORDER VACATING
CURRENT TRIAL DATE AND SETTING
NEW DATES AND EXCLUDING TIME
UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
Date: 9-2-11
Time: 10:00 a.m.
Courtroom: Honorable EDWARD J. GARCIA
Defendant Behrooz Badie, through his counsel of record, Patrick K. Hanly, defendant Dino Rosetti, through his counsel of record Mark Reichel, and plaintiff United States of America, through its counsel, Assistant United States Attorney Philip A. Ferrari, agree and stipulate that the current trial confirmation hearing date of September 2, 2011 and the current trial date of September 19, 2011 shall be vacated and in its place the Court shall set the following schedule:
Trial Confirmation Hearing: September 9, 2011
Trail: September 26, 2011
This request is made to afford defense counsel additional time to consider a plea offer from the government made last week and to review over 400 pages of discovery provided by the government on Monday of this week. The defense is hopeful they can resolve the case without the need for a trial but need more time to go over the plea offer with their clients. The government has no objection to the requested continuance. The continuance is not sought for purposes of delay but to allow for effective trial preparation and careful consideration of a new plea offer from the government.
The parties further agree and stipulate that time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded from the date of this stipulation until and including September 26, 2011 based upon 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h) (1) (d) and 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h) (7) (B) (iv), and Local Code T4,
Mark Reichel
Attorney for Defendant
Dino Rosetti
Patrick K. Hanly
Attorney for Defendant
Behrooz Badie
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
By:Philip A. Ferrari
Assistant United States Attorney
ORDER
Based on the stipulation of the parties and good cause appearing there from, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court specifically finds that the ends of justice served by the granting of such continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The Court also finds that time should be excluded for the filing of motions from the time the motions are filed until such time as the Court has ruled on the motions. Based on these findings and pursuant to the stipulation of the parties, the Court hereby adopts the stipulation of the parties in its entirety as its Order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
HONORABLE EDWARD J. GARCIA
United States District Court Judge