Opinion
No. CR 09-01118 DLJ
11-22-2011
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. BEOB JOON YOO, Defendant.
MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612) United States Attorney MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630) Chief, Criminal Division SUSAN KNIGHT (CSBN 209013) Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for Plaintiff
MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)
United States Attorney
MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630)
Chief, Criminal Division
SUSAN KNIGHT (CSBN 209013)
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for Plaintiff
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING HEARING DATE AND EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
SAN JOSE VENUE
The undersigned parties respectfully request that the status hearing currently scheduled for November 29, 2011 be continued to January 12, 2012. The reason for the continuance is that defense counsel Patrick Valencia is continuing his investigation, and needs additional time to review the evidence in the case. In addition, Mr. Valencia will be in trial the first week of December, and AUSA Susan Knight will be in trial in United States v. Qin, CR 11-00083 PJH, during the week of December 12, 2011. The Court is unavailable on November 29, 2011. The parties also request an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act from November 29, 2011 through January 12, 2011. The parties agree and stipulate that an exclusion of time is appropriate based on the defendant's need for effective preparation of counsel.
SO STIPULATED:
MELINDA HAAG
United States Attorney
SUSAN KNIGHT
Assistant United States Attorney
PATRICK VALENCIA
Counsel for Mr. Yoo
ORDER
Accordingly, for good cause shown, the Court HEREBY ORDERS that the status hearing in United States v. Beob Joon Yoo currently scheduled for November 29, 2011 is continued to January 12, 2012 at 9:00 a.m.
The Court FURTHER ORDERS that time be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from November 29, 2011 through January 12, 2012. The Court finds, based on the aforementioned reasons, that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. The Court therefore concludes that this exclusion of time should be made under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). SO ORDERED.
D. LOWELL JENSEN
United States District Judge