Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cr-00113/USCOURTS-cand-4_06-cr-00113-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Clement Chan
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

CR 06-113 PJH

KEVIN V. RYAN (CSBN 118321)

United States Attorney

EUMI L. CHOI (WVBN 0722) 

Chief, Criminal Division

SUSAN R. JERICH (CSBN 188462) 

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7158

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234

Email: susan.jerich@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) No.: CR 06-113 PJH

)

Plaintiff, ) PARTIES’ STIPULATION AND 

) PROPOSED ORDER EXCLUDING 

v. ) TIME UNDER SPEEDY TRIAL ACT

)

CLEMENT CHAN, )

)

 Defendant. )

____________________________________) 

The parties stipulate and agree, and the Court finds and holds, as follows:

1. The parties appeared before this Court on April 5, 2006 for the defendant’s initial

appearance on the indictment. 

2. Subsequent to a bail review hearing, the Court agreed to continue the matter until May 17,

2006 for change of plea or trial setting. 

3. Counsel for the defendant indicated that he required additional time to receive and review

the forensic discovery in this matter. The defendant requested an exclusion of time based upon

effective preparation of counsel. The request was granted by the Court. 

4. The parties move that the time period from April 5, 2006 through May 17, 2006, be

excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act due to effective preparation of

Case 4:06-cr-00113-PJH Document 14 Filed 04/13/06 Page 1 of 3
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

CR 06-113 PJH 2

counsel. 

5. In light of the foregoing facts, the failure to grant the requested exclusion 

would unreasonably deny counsel for the defense the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A),

(B)(iv). The ends of justice would be served by the Court excluding the proposed time period. 

These ends outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See id. §

3161(h)(8)(A). 

6. For the reasons stated, the time period from April 5, 2006 through May 17, 2006, shall be

excluded from the calculation of time under the Speedy Trial Act. 

SO STIPULATED.

DATED: 4/10/06 Respectfully Submitted, 

_/s/______________________________

SUSAN R. JERICH

Assistant United States Attorney

DATED: 4/11/06

_/s/_______________________________

GARRICK LEW 

Counsel for Defendant 

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: __________________________________

HON. PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON

Judge, United States District Court

4/13/06

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton

Case 4:06-cr-00113-PJH Document 14 Filed 04/13/06 Page 2 of 3
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

CR 06-113 PJH 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the Parties’ Stipulation and Proposed

Order in the case of United States v. Clement Chan No. CR 06-113 PJH, was served today as

follows:

Via Facsimile

Garrick Lew, Esq. 

600 Townsend Street, Suite 329E

San Francisco, CA 94103

FAX: 415-522-1506

I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on 4/10/06 at San Francisco, California.

 /s/ 

Rawaty Yim

United States Attorney’s Office

Case 4:06-cr-00113-PJH Document 14 Filed 04/13/06 Page 3 of 3