United States v. Hayes

2:16-cr-00190 | E.D. Cal. | May 17, 2017

PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney SHELLEY D. WEGER Assistant United States Attorney 501 I Street, Suite 10-100 Sacramento, CA 95814 Telephone: (916) 554-2700 Facsimile: (916) 554-2900 Attorneys for Plaintiff United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, CASE NO. 2:16-CR-00190 TLN Plaintiff, STIPULATION AND FINDINGS AND ORDER TO

CONTINUE STATUS CONFERENCE, AND TO v. EXCLUDE TIME UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT JEFFREY HAYES,

DATE: May 18, 2017 TIME: 9:30 a.m.

Defendant. COURT: Hon. Troy L. Nunley STIPULATION 1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 18, 2017. 2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until July 13,

2017, at 9:30 a.m., and to exclude time between May 18, 2017, and July 13, 2017, under Local Code T4. 3. The parties agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: a) The discovery in this case consists of several hundred pages of records, reports and photographs, as well as, an audio recording of the defendant’s statement to law enforcement. In addition, there are two electronic devices, both of which contain material restricted by 18 U.S.C. § 3509(m). All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for inspection.

b) The United States now has additional discovery consisting of over 900 gigabytes of data obtained from Dropbox, which contains material restricted by 18 U.S.C. § 3509(m). The 1 United States is in the process of reviewing this evidence and has made it available for inspection by the defense. Defense counsel needs time to review it and time for further discussions with his client.

c) Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
d) The government does not object to the continuance. e) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the
case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a trial within the original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act.
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 of May 18, 2017, to July 13, 2017, inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv), 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 interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK

2 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.

Dated: May 16, 2017 PHILLIP A. TALBERT United States Attorney /s/ SHELLEY D. WEGER SHELLEY D. WEGER Assistant United States Attorney

Dated: May 16, 2017 /s/ MICHAEL ROSS

MICHAEL ROSS

Counsel for Defendant Jeffrey Hayes

FINDINGS AND ORDER

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED this 16 th day of May, 2017. 3