From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Holmes

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 28, 2015
14-cr-317 MCE (E.D. Cal. Jul. 28, 2015)

Opinion

          HEATHER E. WILLIAMS, Federal Defender, MATTHEW C. BOCKMON, Assistant Federal Defender, Designated Counsel for Service Sacramento, CA, Attorney for Defendant MICHAEL HOLMES.

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, MICHELE BECKWITH, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff.


          STIPULATION AND ORDER CONTININUING STATUS CONFERENCE AND EXCLUDING TIME

          MORRISON C. ENGLAND, Jr., Chief District Judge.

         IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between the parties hereto through their respective counsel, Michele Beckwith, Assistant United States Attorney, attorney for Plaintiff, Heather Williams, Federal Defender, through Assistant Federal Defender Matthew C. Bockmon, attorney for Michael Holmes that the status conference hearing date of July 30, 2015 be vacated, and the matter be set for status conference on September 3, 2015 at 9:00 a.m.

         The continuance is requested for further case investigation by both parties, to allow both parties to construct a resolution and for defense counsel to meet and confer with the defendant regarding the resolution of this case.

         Based upon the foregoing, the parties agree time under the Speedy Trial Act should be excluded of this order's date through and including September 3, 2015; pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(7)(A)and (B)(iv)[reasonable time to prepare] and General Order 479, Local Code T4 based upon continuity of counsel and defense preparation.

          ORDER

         IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, the Court, having received, read, and considered the parties' stipulation, and good cause appearing therefrom, adopts the parties' stipulation in its entirety as its order. The Court specifically finds the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds the ends of justice are served by granting the requested continuance and outweigh the best interests of the public and defendant in a speedy trial.

         The Court orders the time from the date the parties stipulated, up to and including September 3, 2015, shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this case must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) and(B)(iv) [reasonable time for counsel to prepare] and General Order 479, (Local Code T4). It is further ordered the July 30, 2015 status conference shall be continued until September 3, 2015, at 9:00 a.m.

         IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Holmes

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 28, 2015
14-cr-317 MCE (E.D. Cal. Jul. 28, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Holmes

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. MICHAEL HOLMES, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California

Date published: Jul 28, 2015

Citations

14-cr-317 MCE (E.D. Cal. Jul. 28, 2015)