Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cr-00775/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cr-00775-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Robert Hanna
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 [PROP.] ORDER

CR 06-0775 PJH

KEVIN V. RYAN (CSBN 118321)

United States Attorney

MARK L. KROTOSKI (CSBN 138549)

Chief, Criminal Division

TAMARA WEBER (ILSBN 6270925)

Special Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, CA 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-6838

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234

 tamara.weber@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT HANNA,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 06-0775 PJH

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

EXCLUDING TIME

18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)

SAN FRANCISCO VENUE

The parties stipulate as follows:

1. The government and attorney Roy E. Miller on behalf of the defendant, who was

present, appeared before the Honorable Phyllis J. Hamilton on December 21, 2006 for a Trial

Setting Hearing. The parties agreed, and the Court found and held, as follows:

2. The parties have agreed to an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to

grant the requested continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant and the government the

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

diligence. As government counsel advised the Court, the continuance is necessary because there

are over one thousand images in discovery, which defense counsel may need multiple 

Case 4:06-cr-00775-PJH Document 9 Filed 12/22/06 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 [PROP.] ORDER

CR 06-0775 PJH 2

opportunities to view, inspect or examine in the presence of law enforcement as mandated by the

Adam Walsh Act. The continuance is also necessary because defense counsel is in the process

of seeking a forensic expert, and he would need additional time to do so for effective

preparation, taking into account due diligence.

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

excluding the period from December 21, 2006 to February 28, 2007, outweigh the best interest

of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A).

4. Accordingly, and with the consent of the defendant, the Court ordered that the period

from December 21, 2006 to February 28, 2007 be excluded from Speedy Trial calculations under

18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(A) & (B)(iv). 

5. In light of the need for additional time to provide discovery, review discovery, and

effectively prepare, the parties stipulated that time from December 21, 2006 to February 28,

2007 should be excluded from the Speedy Trial Act calculations on the basis of effective

preparation of both defense counsel and the United States.

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

DATED: 12/22/06 _________/s/_______________________

TAMARA WEBER

Special Assistant United States Attorney

DATED: 12/22/06 _________/s/_______________________

 ROY E. MILLER

Attorney for ROBERT HANNA

IT IS SO ORDERED. The parties shall appear on February 28, 2007 at 2:30 p.m. for

Trial/Motion Setting Hearings. The time from December 21, 2006 to February 28, 2007 shall be

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

ends of justice outweigh the interest of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial. 

DATED:_____________________ ________________________________

THE HON. PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

United States District Judge

12/22/06

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:06-cr-00775-PJH Document 9 Filed 12/22/06 Page 2 of 2