From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Sixing Liu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Apr 18, 2012
Crim. No. 11-208 (SRC) (D.N.J. Apr. 18, 2012)

Opinion

Crim. No. 11-208 (SRC)

04-18-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SIXING LIU

form and entry consented to: L. Judson Welle Gurbir S. Grewal Assistant U.S. Attorneys James Tunick, Esq. Counsel for defendant Sixing Liu


Hon, Stanley R. Chesler


ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE

This matter having come before the Court on the joint application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey (L. Judson Welle and Gurbir S. Grewal, Assistant U.S. Attorneys, appearing), and defendant Sixing Liu (James Tunick, Esq., appearing), for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter, and three continuances having previously been granted by the Court pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h) (7) (A), and the defendant being aware that he has a right to have the matter brought to trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance before a judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of the United States Code, Section 3161(c)(1), and the defendant having consented to the continuance and waived such right to the extent of the continuance appearing below, and for good cause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should be continued for the following reasons:

(1) On or about April 5, 2012, the grand jury returned a Second Superseding Indictment in this matter, which contains new allegations and counts;

(2) Counsel for defendant desires additional time to prepare for trial, which preparations are expected to include analyzing the Second Superseding Indictment, reviewing anticipated discovery related to the same, and assessing the need for pretrial motions and/or expert witness testimony regarding the same;

(3) The failure to grant the continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence; and

(4) Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h) (7), the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS, therefore, on this __ day of April, 2012,

ORDERED that this action be, and it hereby is, continued from the date of this order until September 11, 2012; and it is further

ORDERED that the period from the date of this order until September 11, 2012 shall be excludable in computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974.

______________________

HON. STANLEY R. CHESLER

United States District Judge

form and entry

consented to:

______________________

L. Judson Welle

Gurbir S. Grewal

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

______________________

James Tunick, Esq.

Counsel for defendant Sixing Liu


Summaries of

United States v. Sixing Liu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
Apr 18, 2012
Crim. No. 11-208 (SRC) (D.N.J. Apr. 18, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Sixing Liu

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. SIXING LIU

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

Date published: Apr 18, 2012

Citations

Crim. No. 11-208 (SRC) (D.N.J. Apr. 18, 2012)