Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cr-00227/USCOURTS-caed-2_16-cr-00227-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Silas Duane Boston
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME

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 

PHILLIP A. TALBERT 

United States Attorney 

MATTHEW D. SEGAL 

HEIKO P. COPPOLA 

JEREMY J. KELLEY 

Assistant United States Attorneys 

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, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

SILAS DUANE BOSTON, 

 Defendant. 

CASE NO. 2:16-CR-227 JAM 

ORDER EXCLUDING TIME 

1. On January 10, 2017, the Court held its first status conference in this matter. 

2. The Court advised counsel that it intended to hold monthly status conferences in this 

case. The Court did not set a trial date. The Court advised counsel that trial would probably be set for 

fall 2017. 

3. The Government represented that it had delivered to the defense approximately three 

thousand pages of discovery and several audio recordings. 

4. Counsel for the Defendant represented that they were preparing the defense by reviewing 

evidence and attempting to identify experts to assist in the defense. Counsel for the Defendant stated 

that they were unable to predict when they could be ready for trial and requested that the case be set for 

another status conference on February 14, 2017. 

5. The Court continued the case for a further status conference on 9:15 a.m. on February 14, 

Case 2:16-cr-00227-JAM Document 16 Filed 02/03/17 Page 1 of 2
 

2 [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME

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 

2017 and excluded time through that date. 

6. For the purpose of computing the time within which trial must commence under the 

Speedy Trial Act, the time period of January 10, 2017 to February 14, 2017, inclusive, is excludable 

pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court finds that the ends of justice served by taking such 

action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. This is because failure 

to grant such a continuance would deny counsel for the defendant the reasonable time necessary for 

effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. 

§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv). 

IT IS SO FOUND AND ORDERED this 2nd day of February, 2017. 

/s/ John A. Mendez

 THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

Case 2:16-cr-00227-JAM Document 16 Filed 02/03/17 Page 2 of 2