From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States v. Venegas

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 30, 2015
2:12-CR-00310-TLN (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)

Opinion

          BENJAMIN B. WAGNER, United States Attorney, Edward M. Robinson, approval via email, SAMUEL WONG, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Attorney for Plaintiff.

          Edward M. Robinson, LAW OFFICE OF EDWARD M. ROBINSON, Torrance, CA, ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANT NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS.


          STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; FINDINGS & ORDER

          TROY L. NUNLEY, District Judge.

         STIPULATION

         Plaintiff United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, Assistant United States Attorney Samuel Wong and defendant NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS by and through his counsel of record Edward M. Robinson, hereby stipulate as follows:

         1. By previous Order, this matter was set for status on Thursday, August 6, 2015 at 9:30 a.m.

         2. By this stipulation, the parties move to continue the status conference for defendant NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS only to Thursday, September 24, 2015 at 9:30 a.m. and to exclude the time period between the date of this stipulation, July 30, 2015, and the proposed new status conference hearing date, September 24, 2015, from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T4. Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

         3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find and Order the following:

         a. Counsel for defendant NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS requires additional time to consult with his client, to review the current charges, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges, to review and copy discovery for this matter, to discuss potential resolution his client, to prepare pretrial motions, and to otherwise prepare for trial.

         b. Counsel for defendant NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.

         c. The government does not object to the continuance.

         d. Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the case as requested outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

         f. For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period from the date of this stipulation, July 30, 2015, to and including the date of the proposed new status September 24, 2015, shall be excluded pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and B(iv) and Local Code T4 because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendant's request on the basis of the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

         4. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial must commence.

         IT IS SO STIPULATED.

          ORDER

         UPON GOOD CAUSE SHOWN and the stipulation of all parties, it is ordered that the August 6, 2015, status conference hearing for NEMESSIS ROSENDO VENEGAS only be continued to September 24, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. Based on the representation of defense counsel and good cause appearing therefrom, the Court hereby finds that the failure to grant a continuance in this case would deny defense counsel reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. The Court finds that the ends of justice to be served by granting a continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. It is ordered that time beginning from the parties' stipulation, July 30, 2015, up to and including the September 24, 2015, status conference shall be excluded from computation of time within which the trial of this matter must be commenced under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(iv) and Local Code T-4, to allow defense counsel reasonable time to prepare.

         IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED.


Summaries of

United States v. Venegas

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, E.D. California
Jul 30, 2015
2:12-CR-00310-TLN (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)
Case details for

United States v. Venegas

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. EDILIO NAVARRO NEMESSIS ROSENDO…

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

Date published: Jul 30, 2015

Citations

2:12-CR-00310-TLN (E.D. Cal. Jul. 30, 2015)