From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Vu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 28, 2011
2:10-CR-00284-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2011)

Opinion

2:10-CR-00284-MCE

09-28-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DIEP VU, et al., Defendants.

BENJAMIN WAGNER United States Attorney TODD LERAS Assistant United States Attorney MATTHEW BOCKMON Attorney for Defendant NHUNG VU DINA SANTOS Attorney for Defendant HUNG PHAM MARK REICHEL Attorney for Defendant CUONG LONG DAVID FISCHER Attorney for Defendant THUY TRAN MICHAEL CHASTAINE Attorney for Defendant CHIEN LE HAYES H. GABLE, III Attorney for Defendant TUAN CHU ERIN J. RADEKIN Attorney for Defendant DIEP VU


ERIN J. RADEKIN

Attorney at Law - SBN 214964

Attorney for Defendant

DIEP VU

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO

CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE


STIPULATION

Plaintiff, United States of America, by and through its counsel, Assistant United States Attorney Todd Leras, defendant Nhung Vu, by and through his counsel, Matthew Bockmon, defendant Hung Pham, by and through her counsel, Dina Santos, defendant Cuong Long, by and through his counsel, Mark Reichel, defendant Thuy Tran, by and through her counsel, David Fischer, defendant Chien Le, by and through his counsel, Michael Chastaine, defendant Tuan Chu, by and through his counsel, Hayes H. Gable, III, and defendant, Diep Vu, by and through his counsel, Erin J. Radekin, agree and stipulate to vacate the date set for status conference, September 29, 2011 at 9:00 a.m., and to continue the status conference to December 1, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. in the courtroom of the Honorable Morrison C. England, Jr.

The reason for this request is that all above-named defense counsel need additional time for defense preparation and plea negotiations. The Court is advised that Mr. Leras concurs with this request and that he, and all defense counsel named above, have authorized Ms. Radekin to sign this stipulation on their behalf.

The parties further agree and stipulate that the time period from the filing of this stipulation until December 1, 2011 should be excluded in computing time for commencement of trial under the Speedy Trial Act, based upon the interest of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, to allow continuity of counsel and to allow reasonable time necessary for effective defense preparation. It is further agreed and stipulated that the ends of justice served in granting the request outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

Accordingly, the parties respectfully request the Court adopt this proposed stipulation. IT IS SO STIPULATED

BENJAMIN WAGNER

United States Attorney

TODD LERAS

Assistant United States Attorney

MATTHEW BOCKMON

Attorney for Defendant

NHUNG VU

DINA SANTOS Attorney for Defendant

HUNG PHAM

MARK REICHEL

Attorney for Defendant

CUONG LONG

DAVID FISCHER

Attorney for Defendant

THUY TRAN

MICHAEL CHASTAINE

Attorney for Defendant

CHIEN LE

HAYES H. GABLE, III

Attorney for Defendant

TUAN CHU

ERIN J. RADEKIN

Attorney for Defendant

DIEP VU

ORDER

For the reasons set forth in the accompanying stipulation and declaration of counsel, the status conference of September 29, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. is VACATED and the above-captioned matter is set for status conference on December 1, 2011 at 9:00 a.m. The court finds excludable time in this matter through December 1, 2011 under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, to allow continuity of counsel and to allow reasonable time necessary for effective defense preparation. For the reasons stipulated by the parties, the Court finds that the interest of justice served by granting the request outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A), (h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MORRISON C. ENGLAND, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Vu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 28, 2011
2:10-CR-00284-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Vu

Case Details

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

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

Date published: Sep 28, 2011

Citations

2:10-CR-00284-MCE (E.D. Cal. Sep. 28, 2011)