Opinion
22-MJ-00555-BNW
10-18-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ARCELI SANCHEZ, Defendant,
STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL
(FIRST REQUEST)
IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between ARCELI SANCHEZ, Defendant, by and through counsel JAMES C. GALLO, JR., ESQ.; and the United States of America, by and through, ANGELICA MARMORSTEIN, ESQ., Assistant United States Attorney, and the Trial currently scheduled for October 19, 2022, at the hour of 9:00 a.m., be continued to a date and time to be set by this Honorable Court.
This Stipulation is entered into for the following reasons:
1. Counsel for Defendant has requested a continuance from Assistant U.S. Attorney Angelica Marmorstein who has no objection to this continuance.
2. Counsel for Defendant will be in a hearing in several preliminary hearings in Justice Court and one is in-custody that are scheduled to go for argument at the same time and day.
3. Counsel for Defendant a continuance of forty-five days, if possible, to appear in court, as Defendant has also just started a brand-new job.
4. Denial for this request for continuance would deny the parties herein time and the opportunity to appear in person, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
5. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance would result in a miscarriage of justice.
6. For all the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the Trial date.
7. 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, 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7) (A), considering the factors under 18 U.S.C. 3161 (h)(7)(B)(i) and 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv).
8. This is the first request for a continuance of the Trial date in this case.
ORDER TO CONTINUE TRIAL
(First Request)
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based on the pending Stipulation of counsel, and good cause appearing therefore, the Court finds:
1. Counsel for Defendant has requested a continuance from Assistant U.S. Attorney Angelica Marmorstein who has no objection to this continuance.
2. Counsel for Defendant will be in a hearing in several preliminary hearings in Justice Court and one is in-custody that are scheduled to go for argument at the same time and day.
3. Counsel for Defendant a continuance of forty-five days, if possible, to appear in court, as Defendant has also just started a brand-new job.
4. Denial for this request for continuance would deny the parties herein time and the opportunity to appear in person, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
5. Additionally, denial of this request for continuance would result in a miscarriage of justice.
6. For all the above-stated reasons, the ends of justice would best be served by a continuance of the Trial date.
7. 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, 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7) (A), considering the factors under 18 U.S.C. 3161 (h)(7)(B)(i) and 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv).
8. This is the first request for a continuance of the Trial date in this case.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The end of justice served by granting said continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and defendant in a speedy trial since the failure to grant said continuance would likely 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 sentencing taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
The continuance sought herein is excludable under the Speedy Trial Act, Title 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7) (B)(i), considering the factors under title 18 U.S.C. 3161 (h)(7)(B)(i) and 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv).
ORDER
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Trial scheduled for October 19, 2022, at the hour of 9:00 a.m., be vacated and continued for a short continuance to this 4th day of January, 2023, at the hour of 9:00a.m./p.m. in Courtroom 3B .