Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cr-00764/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cr-00764-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Herrera-Santos
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

CR 07-764-SI 1

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CABN 44332)

United States Attorney

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

Chief, Criminal Division

TAREK J. HELOU (CABN 218225)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7071

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234

Tarek.J.Helou@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

JUAN HERRERA-SANTOS,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR No. 07-764-SI

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER

EXCLUDING TIME UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 3161

On December 21, 2007, the parties in this case appeared before the Court and stipulated that

time from December 21, 2007 through January 25, 2008 should be excluded from Speedy Trial

Act calculations because defense counsel needs adequate time to review discovery, which

government counsel has produced and additional discovery, which the government will produce.

The parties represented to the Court that the length of the requested continuance was the

reasonable amount of time necessary for effective preparation of defense counsel, taking into

account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). The parties also agreed

Case 3:07-cr-00764-SI Document 14 Filed 01/17/2008 Page 1 of 2 Case 3:07-cr-00764-SI Document 15 Filed 01/22/08 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

CR 07-764-SI 2

that the ends of justice served by this continuance outweighed the best interests of the public and

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

SO STIPULATED:

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO

United States Attorney

DATED: January 17, 2008 /s/

TAREK J. HELOU

Assistant United States Attorney 

DATED: January 17, 2008 /s/

STEVEN KALAR

Attorney for Defendant JUAN HERRERA-SANTOS

As the Court found on December 21, 2007, and for the reasons stated above, the Court finds

that the ends of justice served by the requested continuance outweigh the best interests of the

public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The Court also finds that time from December 21,

2007 through January 25, 2008 shall be excluded from Speedy Trial Act calculations for

effective preparation of defense counsel. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). Failing 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. 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv).

SO ORDERED.

DATED:______________ _____________________________________

THE HONORABLE SUSAN ILLSTON

United States District Judge

Case 3:07-cr-00764-SI Document 14 Filed 01/17/2008 Page 2 of 2 Case 3:07-cr-00764-SI Document 15 Filed 01/22/08 Page 2 of 2