Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cr-00082/USCOURTS-cand-3_08-cr-00082-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Gilbert Haro
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

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Excluding Time, 08-0082 SI 1

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CSBN 44332)

United States Attorney

BRIAN STRETCH (CSBN 163973)

Chief, Criminal Division

DENISE MARIE BARTON (MABN 634052)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7359

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234

denise.barton@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GILBERT HARO,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR No. 08-0082 SI

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

EXCLUDING TIME

On March 13, 2008, the parties in this case appeared before the Court and stipulated that

time should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculations from March 13, 2008 through

March 21, 2008. The parties represented that granting the continuance was necessary for

//

//

//

//

//

Case 3:08-cr-00082-SI Document 11 Filed 04/25/2008 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:08-cr-00082-SI Document 13 Filed 04/29/08 Page 1 of 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

Stipulation and [Proposed] Order Excluding Time, 08-0082 SI 2

effective preparation of counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, to afford

counsel time to prepare, produce, and review discovery. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

SO STIPULATED:

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

DATED: April 25, 2008 /s/ Denise Barton

DENISE MARIE BARTON

Assistant United States Attorney

DATED: April 25, 2008 /s/

STEVEN NARATIL

KIMBERLEY CAZINHA,

Attorney for GILBERT HARO

As the Court found on March 13, 2008, and for the reasons stated above, the Court finds that

the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial and that time should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act

calculations from March 13, 2008 through March 21, 2008 for effective preparation of counsel. 

See 18 U.S.C. §3161 (h)(8)(A). The failure to grant the requested continuance would deny

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

due diligence, and would result in a miscarriage of justice. See 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

SO ORDERED.

DATED: _____________________ ________________________________

HON. SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Court Judge

Case 3:08-cr-00082-SI Document 11 Filed 04/25/2008 Page 2 of 2 Case 3:08-cr-00082-SI Document 13 Filed 04/29/08 Page 2 of 2