From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Lee

United States District Court, E.D. California, Sacramento Division
Feb 27, 2006
Case No. CR.S-05-0182-LKK (E.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. CR.S-05-0182-LKK.

February 27, 2006

STEVEN F. GRUEL (CSBN 213148), San Francisco, California, JOHN T. PHILIPSBORN (CSBN 83944), San Francisco, CA, Attorneys for JULIE YANG LEE.


UNOPPOSED and EXPEDIATED DEFENSE MOTION AND ORDER CONTINUING STATUS CONFERENCE


Defendant, Julie Yang Lee, through and by her attorney, Steven F. Gruel hereby respectfully moves the Court to continue the Status Conference scheduled for February 28, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. to March 28, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. The parties are currently litigating, and will continue to be litigate, the defendant's discovery requests. The defendant requested and the government provided the grand jury testimony and FBI reports of witness Jeffrey Chen. However, on February 21, 2006, Magistrate Judge Hollows granted some and denied other of Mrs. Lee's request for discovery pertaining to witness Jeffrey Chen, and the government has indicated that it will inquire into the existence of specific materials addressed on that date. At this same hearing, the defense also informed the Magistrate Judge Hollows that the defense has requested and the government has objected to early Jencks material disclosures pertaining to any witnesses that will testify in the parallel California State prosecution. The defense will file this discovery motion seeking accelerated Jencks disclosures because of the need for the defense to make use of all available discovery in the parallel state and federal prosecutions.

The government represents that it is prepared to proceed to trial at the earliest available date, but does not oppose the defendant's motion for a continuance.

The parties concur that the time between February 28, 2006 to March 28, 2006 is excluded under the Speedy trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sections 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv) (time to prepare), Local Code T4.

ORDER REGARDING STATUS CONFERNCE

PREDICATED on the above motion and GOOD CAUSE APPEARING THEREFROM, the Court continues this matter for further status conference to March 28, 2006 at 9:30 a.m. Defense counsel requests and needs time to file and litigate further discovery motions. The Court finds that the time between February 28, 2006 to March 28, 2006 is excluded under the Speedy trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sections 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv) (time to prepare), Local Code T4.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

U.S. v. Lee

United States District Court, E.D. California, Sacramento Division
Feb 27, 2006
Case No. CR.S-05-0182-LKK (E.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2006)
Case details for

U.S. v. Lee

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JULIE YANG LEE, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, E.D. California, Sacramento Division

Date published: Feb 27, 2006

Citations

Case No. CR.S-05-0182-LKK (E.D. Cal. Feb. 27, 2006)