From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Mar 12, 2013
No. CR 5:13-MJ-70031 HRL (N.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2013)

Opinion

No. CR 5:13-MJ-70031 HRL

03-12-2013

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JASON KEITH SMITH, Defendant.

MELINDA L. HAAG (CABN 132612) United States Attorney MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630) Chief, Criminal Division JOSEPH FAZIOLI (ILBN 6273413) Assistant United States Attorney Attorneys for the United States


MELINDA L. HAAG (CABN 132612)
United States Attorney
MIRANDA KANE (CABN 150630)
Chief, Criminal Division
JOSEPH FAZIOLI (ILBN 6273413)
Assistant United States Attorney
Attorneys for the United States

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER CONTINUING APPEARANCE

DATE AND EXCLUDING TIME FROM

THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

CALCULATION (18 U.S.C.

§ 3161(h)(8)(A))

This matter is scheduled before the Court for an preliminary hearing or arraignment on Marc 14, 2013. On January 14, 2013, this Court issued a criminal complaint against the defendant related to a violation of 18 U.S.C. 875(c) - Interstate Communications of a Threat. The defendant, who resides in the Eastern District of Michigan, was arrested and made an initial appearance on January 22, 2013 in Detroit before United States Eastern District of Michigan Magistrate Judge Laurie J. Michelson. The defendant is currently represented by Eastern District of Michigan Assistant Federal Public Defenders Penny R. Beardslee and Loren E. Khogali. On January 23, 2013, Judge Michelson ordered the defendant released pursuant to conditions, ordered the defendant be transferred to the Northern District of California for further proceedings, excluded time, and ordered the defendant to appear in the Northern District of California on March 14, 2013 at 9 a.m.

The United States and the defendant now request a continuance until May 23, 2013. in order to afford defense counsel additional time to effectively prepare and also to allow the parties an opportunity to discuss a potential pre-indictment resolution of the mattter. The parties agree, and the Court finds and holds, as follows:

1. The preliminary hearing or arraignment is continued to May 23, 2013.

2. Time should be excluded under Rule 5.1 from March 14, 2013 to May 23, 2013 in order to allow defense counsel additional time to effectively prepare and also to allow the parties an opportunity to discuss a potential pre-indictment resolution of the mattter. The parties agree that the continuance is proper under Rule 5.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and 18 U.S.C. § 3060.

3. The time between March 14, 2013 to May 23, 2013 is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act. The parties agree that the failure to grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. Finally, the parties agree that the ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial and in the prompt disposition of criminal cases. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). STIPULATED:

_______________

PENNY R. BEARDSLEE

LOREN E. KHOGALI

E.D. Michigan Assistant Federal Public Defenders

for Defendant Smith

_______________

JOSEPH FAZIOLI

Assistant United States Attorney
IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

HOWARD R. LLOYD

UNITE D STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

United States v. Smith

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN JOSE DIVISION
Mar 12, 2013
No. CR 5:13-MJ-70031 HRL (N.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2013)
Case details for

United States v. Smith

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JASON KEITH SMITH, Defendant.

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

Date published: Mar 12, 2013

Citations

No. CR 5:13-MJ-70031 HRL (N.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2013)