Opinion
STEVEN L. CRAWFORD, Law Office of Steven L. Crawford, Grover Beach, CA, Attorney for Defendant, ARTURO SANDOVAL-DELGADO.
STIPULATION TO VACATE CHANGE OF PLEA HEARING AND SET TRIAL DATE
LAWRENCE J. O'NEILL, District Judge.
The Defendant Arturo Sandoval-Delgado, by and through his attorney Steven L. Crawford and the United States of America, by and through Benjamin B. Wagner, United States Attorney, and Kimberly Sanchez, Assistant United States Attorney, hereby stipulate to vacate the change of plea hearing currently set for March 16, 2015 at 8:30 a.m. and set this matter for jury trial on September 22, 2015 at 8:30 a.m.
The basis for this stipulation is that the parties were unable to reach a resolution to this case prior to the date for the change of plea, although the parties believed we were very close to doing so. The parties will continue to negotiate and try to resolve this matter, however both parties believe it is in the best interest of the parties and will save judicial resources to set the matter for trial while continuing to negotiate.
As the requested date represents the earliest date that all counsel are available, taking into account schedules, commitments to other clients, and the need for preparation in the case as well as further investigation, the parties request that time be excluded to and through the date of September 22, 2015, in that failure to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant and the government the necessary time for effective preparation, taking into account the parties' due diligence in prosecuting this case. 18 U.S.C. Section 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
Based on the above stated findings, the ends of justice served by setting this trial date as requested outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a trial as prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. Therefore, the parties request the Court vacate the change of plea hearing set for March 16, 2015 and set a trial date in this matter for September 22, 2015.
Granted. The time will be excluded for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act based on the above arguments and that the ends of justice outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant's right to a speedy trial.
IT IS SO ORDERED.