U.S. v. Duran

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JAMES DURAN, Defendant

Court: United States District Court, D. Utah, Northern Division

Date published: Aug 1, 2005

Case No. 1:03-CR-139 DAK (D. Utah Aug. 1, 2005)

Opinion

Case No. 1:03-CR-139 DAK.

August 1, 2005

STEPHEN R. McCAUGHEY, Salt Lake City, Utah, Attorney for Defendant.

FINDINGS AND ORDER

DALE KIMBALL, District Judge

Based on motion of the defendant and stipulation of the plaintiff, the court enters the following;

FINDINGS

1. If defendant's motion to continue were denied it would deny the defendant continuity of counsel.

2. Counsel needs additional time to effectively prepare for trial and consult with the defendant and any potential witness(es).

3. Counsel has exercised due diligence in preparing this case.

4. The ends of justice in granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the trial date of September 19, 2005, be stricken and the trial continued to the 11^th day ofOctober, 2005 at 8:30 a.m.

It is further, ORDERED that the time between September 19, 2005, and the next trial date be excluded from the computation for the time for trial as described in 18 U.S.C. § 3161.