Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cr-00219/USCOURTS-caed-1_11-cr-00219-6/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Kenneth Manuel Martin
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1

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

29

30

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

29

30

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

KENNETH MANUEL MARTIN,

 Defendant,

CASE NO. 1:11-cr-00219 AWI-DLB

STIPULATION TO CONTINUE 

STATUS CONFERENCE; FINDINGS

AND ORDER

DATE: December 10, 2012

TIME: 1:00 P.M.

JUDGE: Hon. Dennis L. Beck

STIPULATION

The United States of America, by and through its counsel of record, and defendant, by and 

through his counsel of record, hereby stipulate as follows: 

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on August 13, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. 

2. By this stipulation, defendant now moves to continue the status conference until 

December 10, 2012 at 1:00 p.m. before Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck, and to exclude time 

between August 13, 2012 and December 10, 2012 under 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and 

3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and (iv). The government does not oppose this request.

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

a. The government has represented that the discovery associated with this case includes 

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER

United States Attorney

HENRY Z. CARBAJAL III

Assistant United States Attorney

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401

Fresno, CA 93721

Telephone: (559) 497-4000

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099

Attorneys for the

United States of America

Case 1:11-cr-00219-DAD Document 37 Filed 08/07/12 Page 1 of 3
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

29

30

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

29

30

over 5,000 pages of discovery, including investigative reports, bank records and related documents.

All of this discovery has been either produced directly to counsel and/or made available for 

inspection and copying.

b. Counsel for defendant desires additional time in preparation of this case. The 

government has provided initial as well as supplementary discovery of several thousand pages. 

Defense counsel needs additional time to review discovery with the client, access the discovery for 

needed motions and investigation, and time to further prepare the case.

c. Counsel for defendant believes that failure to grant the above-requested continuance 

would deny him 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 August 13, 2012 to December 10, 2012, 

inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(A) and 3161(h)(7)(B)(i) and 

(iv) 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.

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 1:11-cr-00219-DAD Document 37 Filed 08/07/12 Page 2 of 3
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

29

30

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

29

30

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: August 7, 2012

/s/ Henry Z. Carbajal III 

HENRY Z. CARBAJAL III

Assistant United States Attorney

DATED: August 7, 2012

/s/Charles J. Lee

CHARLES J. LEE

Counsel for Defendant

KENNETH MANUEL MARTIN

O R D E R

 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 7, 2012 /s/ Gary S. Austin 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

6i0kij8d

Case 1:11-cr-00219-DAD Document 37 Filed 08/07/12 Page 3 of 3