Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cr-00375/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cr-00375-13/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Jorge Estrada
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

SCOTT N. SCHOOLS (SCBN 9990)

United States Attorney

MARK L. KROTOSKI (CSBN 138549)

Chief, Criminal Division

ANDREW P. CAPUTO (CASBN 203655)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7004

Fax: (415) 436-7234

Email: andrew.caputo@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JORGE ESTRADA,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 06-0375 SI

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXCLUDING TIME FROM

SPEEDY TRIAL ACT CALCULATION

(18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A))

With the agreement of the parties, and with the consent of defendant Jorge Estrada, the

Court enters this order documenting defendant’s exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act,

18 U.S.C. § 3161(c)(1), from May 7, 2007, to October 15, 2007. The parties agree, and the Court

finds and holds, as follows:

1. Defendant agreed to an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to grant

the requested continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel. 

Defendant’s counsel, Ms. Falk, has been in trial since mid-January. Because of this trial, Ms.

Falk cannot reasonably commence trial in the instant case on the scheduled trial date of May 7,

2007. The parties have agreed to an alternative trial date of October 15, 2007. Ms. Falk has

established a strong relationship with defendant, and it would not be in defendant’s interest to

Case 3:06-cr-00375-SI Document 44 Filed 05/10/2007 Page 1 of 2
 Case 3:06-cr-00375-SI Document 45 Filed 05/10/07 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

2

seek alternative counsel in order to allow for an earlier trial date.

2. Given these circumstances, the Court found that the ends of justice served by

excluding the period from May 7, 2007, to October 15, 2007, outweigh the best interest of the

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Id. at § 3161(h)(8)(A).

3. Accordingly, and with the consent of the defendant, at the hearing on March 30, 2007,

the Court ordered that the period from May 7, 2007, to October 15, 2007, be excluded from

Speedy Trial Act calculations under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)(iv).

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: April 30, 2007 ____________/s/________________

ELIZABETH FALK

Attorney for Defendant

DATED: April 4, 2007 ____________/s/________________

ANDREW P. CAPUTO

Assistant United States Attorney

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: ______________ ____________________________________

HONORABLE SUSAN Y. ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:06-cr-00375-SI Document 44 Filed 05/10/2007 Page 2 of 2
 Case 3:06-cr-00375-SI Document 45 Filed 05/10/07 Page 2 of 2