From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Zastrow

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 5, 2011
NO. 1:10-cr-00160 LJO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2011)

Opinion

NO. 1:10-cr-00160 LJO

08-05-2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID CHARLES ZASTROW, Defendant.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER United States Attorney By BRIAN ENOS Assistant United States Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff DANIEL J. BRODERICK Federal Defender By ERIC V. KERSTEN Assistant Federal Defender Attorney for Defendant David Charles Zastrow


DANIEL J. BRODERICK, Bar #89424

Federal Defender

ERIC V. KERSTEN, Bar #226429

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

David Charles Zastrow

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING HEARING AND ORDER

Judge: Hon. Lawrence J. O'Neill

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, BRIAN ENOS, Assistant United States Attorney, and ERIC V. KERSTEN, Assistant Federal Defender, counsel for defendant, David Charles Zastrow, that the date for sentencing may be continued to August 26, 2011, or the soonest date thereafter that is convenient to the court. The date currently set for sentencing is August 19, 2011, at 10:30 a.m. The requested new date is August 26, 2011, at 10:30 a.m.

Mr. Zastrow is currently housed in the Kern County Detention Facility. Due to resulting difficulties in communication between Mr. Zastrow and counsel, the defendant's informal objections were not completed until August 3, 2011. The defense is requesting this short continuance to allow the United States Probation Office adequate time to respond to the defendant's informal objections. This will permit sentencing to proceed in an orderly manner.

AUSA Brian Enos was unable to confirm that co-counsel for plaintiff, AUSA Stanley A. Boone, is available on the requested date. In the event that Mr. Boone is not available August 26, 2011, the parties may request another short continuance to a date convenient to all.

The parties agree that the delay resulting from the continuance shall be excluded as necessary for effective defense preparation, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). For this reason, the ends of justice served by the granting of the requested continuance outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial.

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

By BRIAN ENOS

Assistant United States Attorney

Attorney for Plaintiff

DANIEL J. BRODERICK

Federal Defender

By ERIC V. KERSTEN

Assistant Federal Defender

Attorney for Defendant

David Charles Zastrow

ORDER

The intervening period of delay is excluded in the interests of justice pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv). Good cause exists for the continuance as stated in the stipulation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Lawrence J. O'Neill

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Zastrow

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Aug 5, 2011
NO. 1:10-cr-00160 LJO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2011)
Case details for

United States v. Zastrow

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. DAVID CHARLES ZASTROW, Defendant.

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

Date published: Aug 5, 2011

Citations

NO. 1:10-cr-00160 LJO (E.D. Cal. Aug. 5, 2011)