Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-mj-70706/USCOURTS-cand-3_05-mj-70706-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Michael J. Fox
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

[PROP.] ORDER

[3-05-70706] 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

MICHAEL J. FOX,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. 3-05-70706

[PROPOSED] ORDER RE WAIVER

OF TIME UNDER F.R.Cr.P. 5.1 AND

FINDING EXCLUDABLE TIME

UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

18 U.S.C. § 3161(b); (h)(8)(A)&(B)(iv)

The parties appeared before the Court on October 6, 2005. The defendant was

represented by Assistant Federal Public Defender Elizabeth Falk, and the United States

was represented by Assistant United States Attorney Susan Badger. A criminal complaint

was filed in this matter on August 30, 2005, and the defendant made his initial appearance

before Magistrate Zimmerman that same date. The defendant was released on an

unsecured personal recognizance bond. Upon the motion of the defendant, Magistrate

Zimmerman found that Mr. Fox knowingly and voluntarily waived time for indictment
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

[PROP.] ORDER

[3-05-70706] 2

pursuant to Rule 5.1 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and that time was

excluded under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b) and (h)(8)(A) & (B)(iv).

At the appearance on October 5, 2005, AFPD Falk advised the Court that she was

in the process of reviewing discovery with her client and was engaged in discussions with

the government regarding pre-indictment settlement of the case. The defendant indicated

that he was prepared to waive time for indictment under Rule 5.1(c) of the Federal Rules

of Criminal Procedure in order to facilitate the discussions about a possible resolution.

The parties agreed to continue the matter to November 1, 2005 at 9:30 a.m. before

Magistrate Judge Edward Chen for arraignment or preliminary hearing. In light of the

need for time for effective preparation, taking into account due diligence, the defendant

also requested that the time between October 6, 2005 and November 1, 2005 be excluded

from the time requirements of the Speedy Trial Act.

Upon the request of the parties and good cause appearing, the Court accepts the

defendant’s waiver of time for indictment under F.R.Cr.P. 5.1(c). Further, the Court finds

that the time between October 6, 2005 and November 1, 2005 is excluded from the time

requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. 3161(b), in order to provide the parties

reasonable time for effective preparation, that is, to review discovery and discuss possible

settlement of the case, taking into account due diligence. 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(8)(A) &

(B)(iv).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

JAMES LARSON

United States Magistrate Judge UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge James Larson