From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 25, 2012
Case No: 11-CR-428 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)

Opinion

Case No: 11-CR-428 GEB

01-25-2012

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SMITH et al. Defendants.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for RICHARD BENDER Assistant U.S. Attorney By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for MARK REICHEL Counsel for Defendant Bryan Smith By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for STEVEN BAUER Counsel for Defendant Kelly Smith DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender WILLIAM E. BONHAM for TIMOTHY ZINDEL Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant Daniel Goldsmith By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for WILLIAM E. BONHAM Counsel for Defendant Bruce Goldsmith By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for MICHAEL E. HANSEN Counsel for Defendant Robert Klaus By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for A. STANLEY KUBOCHI Counsel for Defendant Ryder Phillips


William E. Bonham, SB# 55478

Hotel de France Bldg., Old Sacramento

Attorney for: Bruce Goldsmith

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE

The defendants, Bryan Smith, Kelly Smith, Daniel Goldsmith, Bruce Goldsmith, Robert Klaus and Ryder Phillips, by and through their undersigned counsels, and the United States, through its undersigned counsel, hereby agree and request the status conference currently set for Friday, January 27, 2012 at 9:00 am be vacated and continued until Friday, March 9, 2012 at 9:00 am.

This continuance is requested because plea offers were recently sent out by the government and defense counsel needs additional time to review the offers, continue review of the voluminous discovery and meet with their respective clients, with an emphasis on determining whether to accept the offers.

The parties stipulate that time should be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act due to the needs of counsel for continued case preparation. Local Code T4 & 18 U.S.C § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(iv).

I, William E. Bonham, the filing party, have received authorization from AUSA Bender and co-counsel to sign and submit this stipulation and proposed order on their behalf.

Accordingly, the defense and the United States stipulate that the status conference for defendants Bryan Smith, Kelly Smith, Daniel Goldsmith, Bruce Goldsmith, Robert Klaus and Ryder Phillips, should be continued until Friday, March 9, 2011 at 9:00 am. The parties stipulate that the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a Speedy Trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By:WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

RICHARD BENDER

Assistant U.S. Attorney

By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

MARK REICHEL

Counsel for Defendant Bryan Smith

By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

STEVEN BAUER

Counsel for Defendant Kelly Smith

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

TIMOTHY ZINDEL

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant Daniel Goldsmith

By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

WILLIAM E. BONHAM

Counsel for Defendant Bruce Goldsmith

By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

MICHAEL E. HANSEN

Counsel for Defendant Robert Klaus

By: WILLIAM E. BONHAM for

A. STANLEY KUBOCHI

Counsel for Defendant Ryder Phillips

ORDER

IT IS SO ORDERED THAT THE status conference for defendants Bryan Smith, Kelly Smith, Daniel Goldsmith, Bruce Goldsmith, Robert Klaus and Ryder Phillips currently set for Friday, January 27, 2012 at 9:00 am is vacated and re-set to Friday, March 9, 2012 at9:00 am.

I find that the continuance is necessary due to the needs of counsel for continued case preparation. Accordingly, time is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from January27, 2012 up to and including March 9, 2012, pursuant to Local Code T4 and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). I find that the ends ofjustice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h) (7)(A).

_________

GARLAND E. BURRELL JR.

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Jan 25, 2012
Case No: 11-CR-428 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)
Case details for

United States v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. SMITH et al. Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Date published: Jan 25, 2012

Citations

Case No: 11-CR-428 GEB (E.D. Cal. Jan. 25, 2012)