Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cr-00310/USCOURTS-caed-1_22-cr-00310-15/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Rosa Fernandez
Defendant
Timothy Robert Hingston
Defendant
Spencer Matthew Hopper
Defendant
Dale Vincent Perez
Defendant
William Arthur Poush
Defendant
USA
Plaintiff

Document Text:

1 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

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 

JESSICA A. MASSEY 

Assistant United States Attorney 

2500 Tulare Street, Suite 4401 

Fresno, CA 93721 

Telephone: (559) 497-4000 

Facsimile: (559) 497-4099 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

United States of America 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

WILLIAM ARTHUR POUSH, 

ROSA FERNANDEZ, 

TIMOTHY ROBERT HINGSTON, 

SPENCER MATTHEW HOPPER, and 

DALE VINCENT PEREZ, 

 Defendants. 

CASE NO. 1:22-CR-00310-JLT-SKO 

STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE 

TIME PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT; 

ORDER 

CURRENT DATE: May 17, 2023 

TIME: 1:00 p.m. 

COURT: Hon. Sheila K. Oberto 

STIPULATION 

1. By previous order, this matter was set for status on May 17, 2023. 

2. By this stipulation, defendants now move to continue the status conference until October 

4, 2023, and to exclude time between May 17, 2023, and October 4, 2023, under 18 U.S.C.§ 

3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4]. 

3. The Court issued a minute order directing the parties to file a stipulation or status memo 

by May 10, 2023. The assigned AUSA is in the process of leaving the U.S. Attorney’s Office, and in 

the process of transferring cases, the parties missed the deadline for the stipulation. + 

4. While the parties anticipate that the case may resolve without a trial, this is not yet a 

certainty. If defendants ultimately do not enter guilty pleas and decide to proceed to trial, the parties 

Case 1:22-cr-00310-JLT-SKO Document 70 Filed 05/11/23 Page 1 of 3
2 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

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 

agree and stipulate, and request that the Court find the following: 

a) This case arose out of a wiretap investigation. The government asserts the 

discovery associated with this case includes reports, photographs, and extensive audio and video 

recordings. Initial discovery has been provided to all counsel. The government anticipates 

significant additional discovery will be provided in the coming week. The government is aware 

of its ongoing discovery obligations. 

b) The government is amendable to providing plea offers to defendants if requested. 

c) Counsel for all defendants desire additional time to consult with their clients, to 

review the current charges, to conduct investigation and research related to the charges, to review 

and/or copy discovery for this matter, to discuss potential resolutions with their clients, to 

prepare pretrial motions, and to otherwise prepare for trial. 

d) Counsel for defendants believe that failure to grant the above-requested 

continuance would deny them the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into 

account the exercise of due diligence. 

e) The government does not object to the continuance. 

f) Based on the above-stated findings, the ends of justice served by continuing the 

case as requested outweigh the interest of the public and the defendants in a trial within the 

original date prescribed by the Speedy Trial Act. 

g) For the purpose of computing time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161, 

et seq., within which trial must commence, the time period of May 17, 2023, to October 4, 2023, 

inclusive, is deemed excludable pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 3161(h)(7)(A), B(iv) [Local Code T4], 

because it results from a continuance granted by the Court at defendants’ request on the basis of 

the Court’s finding that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest 

of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 

5. Nothing in this stipulation and order shall preclude a finding that other provisions of the 

Speedy Trial Act dictate that additional time periods are excludable from the period within which a trial 

Case 1:22-cr-00310-JLT-SKO Document 70 Filed 05/11/23 Page 2 of 3
3 STIPULATION REGARDING EXCLUDABLE TIME 

PERIODS UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

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 

must commence. 

IT IS SO STIPULATED. 

DATED: May 11, 2023 PHILLIP A. TALBERT 

United States Attorney 

 By: /s/ Kimberly A. Sanchez 

KIMBERLY A. SANCHEZ 

Assistant U.S. Attorney 

DATED: : May 11, 2023 By: /s/ Eric Kersten 

ERIC KERSTEN 

Attorney for Defendant 

WILLIAM ARTHUR POUSH 

DATED: : May 11, 2023 By: /s/ Steven Crawford 

STEVEN CRAWFORD 

Attorney for Defendant 

ROSA FERNANDEZ 

DATED: : May 11, 2023 By: /s/ Timothy Hennessy 

TIMOTHY HENNESSY 

Attorney for Defendant 

DALE VINCENT PEREZ 

DATED: February 8, 2023 By: /s/ John Garland 

JOHN GARLAND 

Attorney for Defendant 

TIMOTHY ROBERT HINGSTON 

DATED: : May 11, 2023 By: /s/ W. Scott Quinlan

W. SCOTT QUINLAN 

Attorney for Defendant 

SPENCER MATTHEW HOPPER 

 

ORDER 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 

DATED: ________________ ____________________________________ 

 HON. SHEILA K. OBERTO 

 UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

5/11/2023

Case 1:22-cr-00310-JLT-SKO Document 70 Filed 05/11/23 Page 3 of 3