Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cr-00350/USCOURTS-cand-4_15-cr-00350-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jeffery Bramwell Farr
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

USA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JEFFERY BRAMWELL FARR,

Defendant.

Case No. 15-cr-00350-HSG-1 

ORDER CONTINUING FURTHER 

STATUS CONFERENCE AND 

EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE 

SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

Re: Dkt. No. 22

On March 7, 2016, Defendant Jeffery Bramwell Farr and the government filed a stipulation 

to continue the further status conference set for March 14, 2016, to April 11, 2016, and to exclude 

that time under the Speedy Trial Act. Dkt. No. 22 (“Stip.”). The parties agree that a continuance 

of the status conference is appropriate to allow them to discuss the case and potential resolutions, 

and to afford the defense the time necessary to effectively prepare the case. Id. at 2. 

To permit the parties to discuss resolution of this case and to allow time for effective 

preparation, the Court hereby GRANTS the parties’ Stipulation to continue the further status 

conference set for March 14, 2016, to April 11, 2016, at 2:00pm. The parties will be required to 

appear on April 11, and no further continuance of that hearing will be granted. At the April 11 

hearing, the parties must either be prepared to proceed with a change of plea, or to set a change of 

plea date or a schedule for motions and trial. 

Additionally, for the reasons stated by the parties in their Stipulation, the Court excludes 

time under the Speedy Trial Act from March 14, 2016, to April 11, 2016, and finds that the ends 

of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a 

speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court makes this finding and grants the 

requested continuance on the basis that failure to do so would unreasonably deny the defendant the 

Case 4:15-cr-00350-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/09/16 Page 1 of 2
2

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

United States District Court

Northern District of California

reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due 

diligence. See id. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 9, 2016

________________________

HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 4:15-cr-00350-HSG Document 23 Filed 03/09/16 Page 2 of 2