From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Young

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 16, 2011
NO. CR-S-10-222 JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 16, 2011)

Opinion

NO. CR-S-10-222 JAM

09-16-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG, and KATHLEEN DOCKSTADER, Defendants.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney DANIEL BRODERICK Federal Defender DANIEL McCONKIE Assistant U.S. Attorney Attorney for United States LEXI NEGIN Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG OLAF WILLIAM HEDBERG Attorney for Defendant KATHLEEN DOCKSTADER


DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

LEXI NEGIN, Bar #250376

Assistant Federal Defender

Designated Counsel for Service

Attorney for Defendant

CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG

STIPULATION AND ORDER TO CONTINUE

STATUS HEARING AND TO EXCLUDE TIME

PURSUANT TO THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

Time: 9:30 a.m.

Judge: Hon. John A. Mendez

It is hereby stipulated and agreed to between the United States of America through Daniel McConkie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, and defendants, CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG by and through his counsel, Lexi Negin, Assistant Federal Defender, and KATHLEEN DOCKSTADER by and through her counsel, Olaf William Hedberg, that the status conference set for Tuesday, September 20, 2011, be continued to Tuesday, December 13, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. The reason for this continuance is to allow defense counsel additional time to review discovery with the defendants, to examine possible defenses and to continue investigating the facts of the case. Defense counsel have requested access to a large amount of physical evidence recovered in the case. Due to the schedules of the attorneys for the parties and the expert, that viewing has not been able to take place. A lengthy continuance is sought so that this viewing can take place and the parties can complete the discovery process. All parties are working diligently toward resolving this case.

It is further stipulated that the time period from the date of this stipulation, September 16, 2011, through and including the date of the new status conference hearing, December 13, 2011, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv)and Local Code T4 [reasonable time for defense counsel to prepare], and that the ends of justice to be served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial.

A proposed order is attached and lodged separately for the court's convenience.

Respectfully submitted,

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

DANIEL BRODERICK

Federal Defender

DANIEL McCONKIE

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorney for United States

LEXI NEGIN

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG

OLAF WILLIAM HEDBERG

Attorney for Defendant

KATHLEEN DOCKSTADER

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,

v.

CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG, and KATHLEEN DOCKSTADER, Defendants.

CASE NO. CR-S-10-222 JAM

ORDER CONTINUING STATUS HEARING AND

EXCLUDING TIME PURSUANT TO THE

SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

For the reasons set forth in the stipulation of the parties, filed on September 16, 2011, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the status conference currently scheduled for Tuesday, September 20, 2011, be vacated and that the case be set for Tuesday, December 13, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, for the reasons stated in the parties' September 16, 2011, stipulation, the time under the Speedy Trial Act is excluded from the date of this stipulation, September 16, 2011, through and including December 13, 2011, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(B)(iv) and Local Code T4, due to the need to provide defense counsel with the reasonable time to prepare.

JOHN A. MENDEZ

United States District Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Young

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Sep 16, 2011
NO. CR-S-10-222 JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 16, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Young

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. CLIFFORD JOSEF YOUNG, and KATHLEEN…

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

Date published: Sep 16, 2011

Citations

NO. CR-S-10-222 JAM (E.D. Cal. Sep. 16, 2011)