Free Stipulation - District Court of California - California

Case 4:08-cr-00510-DLJ

Document 8

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 1 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CABN 44332) United States Attorney BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973) Chief, Criminal Division CHRISTINE Y. WONG (NYBN 3988607) Assistant United States Attorney 1301 Clay Street, Suite 340-S Oakland, California 94612-5217 Telephone: (510) 637-3717 Facsimile: (510) 637-3724 E-Mail: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

11 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 12 OAKLAND DIVISION 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 With the agreement of the parties, and with the consent of the defendant, the Court enters this 22 order scheduling an arraignment or preliminary hearing date of August 4, 2008 at 9:30A.M. 23 before the duty magistrate judge, and documenting the defendant's waiver of the preliminary 24 hearing date under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1 and the exclusion of time under the 25 Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b), from July 29, 2008, to August 4, 2008. The parties agree, 26 and the Court finds and holds, as follows: 27 1. The defendant has been released on a $75,000 personal recognizance bond to be co28 signed by two sureties. 1 v. PHILLIP GOUDEAU, Defendant. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. MJ 08-70411 WDB [PROPOSED] ORDER AND STIPULATION FOR CONTINUANCE FROM JULY 29, 2008 TO AUGUST 4, 2008, AND EXCLUDING TIME FROM THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION (18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A)) AND WAIVING TIME LIMITS UNDER RULE 5.1

Case 4:08-cr-00510-DLJ

Document 8

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 2 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

2. The defendant agrees to an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv) to provide continuity of counsel and reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 3. The defendant waives the time limits of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1 for preliminary hearing. 4. Counsel for the defense believes that postponing the preliminary hearing is in her client's best interest, and that it is not in her client's interest for the United States to indict the case during the normal 20-day timeline established in Rule 5.1. 5. The Court finds that, taking into the account the public interest in the prompt disposition of criminal cases, these grounds are good cause for extending the time limits for a preliminary hearing under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1. Given these circumstances, the Court finds that the ends of justice served by excluding the period from July 29, 2008, to August 4, 2008, outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. § 3161(h)(8)(A). 6. Accordingly, and with the consent of the defendant, the Court (1) sets a preliminary hearing date before the duty magistrate judge on August 4, 2008, at 9:30A.M., and (2) orders that the period from July 29, 2008 to August 4, 2008 be excluded from the time period for preliminary hearings under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 5.1 and from Speedy Trial Act calculations under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)(iv). // // // // // // // // //

2

Case 4:08-cr-00510-DLJ

Document 8

Filed 07/21/2008

Page 3 of 3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

IT IS SO STIPULATED:

DATED:

July 21, 2008

______/s/_________________________ COLLEEN MARTIN Attorney for Defendant

DATED:

July 21, 2008

______/s/_________________________ CHRISTINE Y. WONG Assistant United States Attorney

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:________________

_______________________________ HON. WAYNE D. BRAZIL United States Magistrate Judge

3