From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Admasu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Mar 27, 2013
CR 12-00693 RS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2013)

Opinion

CR 12-00693 RS

03-27-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GEBRAEL ADMASU, Defendant.

MELINDA HAAG United States Attorney RANDY LUSKEY Assistant United States Attorney ROGER PATTON Attorney for Gebrael Admasu


MELINDA HAAG (CABN 132612)
United States Attorney
MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630)
Chief, Criminal Division
RANDY LUSKEY (CABN 240915)
Assistant United States Attorney
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7200

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234

randall.luskey@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for the United States of America

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY

TRIAL ACT FROM JANUARY 15, 2013

THROUGH FEBRUARY 26, 2013 AND

FROM MARCH 26, 2013 THROUGH MAY

21, 2013.

On January 15, 2013, the parties in this case appeared before the Honorable Richard Seeborg for a status conference. At that time, defense counsel stated that she would need some additional time to review conduct additional investigation in order to determine whether to file a motion to suppress. The parties jointly requested an extension of time until February 26, 2013 and stipulated that time should be excluded from January 15, 2013 to February 26, 2013 for effective preparation of defense counsel and continuity of counsel. The parties represented that granting the continuance was for the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of defense counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

The parties also agreed that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweighed the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A).

On March 26, 2013, the parties again appeared before the Court for a status conference. At that time, the parties represented that the defendant had obtained new counsel and that the defense was conducting further investigation into the defendant's prior conviction records in order to inform the parties' ongoing plea negotiations. The parties also represented that defense counsel would be away from the office for a large portion of April. The parties jointly requested an extension of time until May 21, 2014 for entry of plea and stipulated that time should be excluded from March 26, 2013 to May 21, 2013 for effective preparation of defense counsel and continuity of counsel. The parties represented that granting the continuance was for the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of defense counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv).

The parties also agreed that the ends of justice served by granting such a continuance outweighed the best interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). IT IS SO STIPULATED:

MELINDA HAAG

United States Attorney

______________

RANDY LUSKEY

Assistant United States Attorney

______________

ROGER PATTON

Attorney for Gebrael Admasu

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that time is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act from January 15, 2013 to February 26, 2013 and from March 26, 2013 to May 21, 2013, under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(B)(iv) and 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________

THE HON. RICHARD SEEBORG

United States District Court Judge


Summaries of

United States v. Admasu

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
Mar 27, 2013
CR 12-00693 RS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Admasu

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. GEBRAEL ADMASU, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Date published: Mar 27, 2013

Citations

CR 12-00693 RS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 27, 2013)