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 & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME

CR 09-1112 MHP 1

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO (CABN 44332)

United States Attorney

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

Chief, Criminal Division

KEVIN J. BARRY (CABN 229748)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7200

Facsimile: (415) 436-7234 Email: kevin.barry@usdoj.gov 

Attorneys for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

CARLOS MIRANDA-GODOY,

 Defendant.

 _________________________________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR No.: 09-1112 MHP

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED]

ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER 18

U.S.C. § 3161

On February 8, 2010, the parties in this case appeared before the Court for a status

conference. At that time, the Court set a further status hearing for February22, 2010 at 10:00

a.m. The parties agreed to exclude the period of time between February 8, 2010 and February

22, 2010 from any time limits applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161. The parties represented that

granting the exclusion would allow the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation of

counsel and that the exclusion was reasonable because of the existence of another proceeding

involving the defendant, specifically, the pendency of an appeal by the defendant in immigration

court. See 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv); 3161(h)(1). The parties also agree that the ends of

Case 3:09-cr-01112-CRB Document 15 Filed 02/18/10 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 & [PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING TIME

CR 09-1112 MHP 2

justice served by granting such an exclusion of time outweigh the best interests of the public and

the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). At the hearing, the Court made

findings consistent with this agreement.

SO STIPULATED:

JOSEPH P. RUSSONIELLO 

United States Attorney

DATED: February 15, 2010 /s/ 

KEVIN J. BARRY

Assistant United States Attorney 

DATED: February 15, 2010 /s/ 

ELIZABETH M. FALK

Attorney for CARLOS MIRANDA-GODOY

[PROPOSED] ORDER

For the reasons stated above and at the February 8, 2010 hearing, the Court finds that the

exclusion from the time limits applicable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161 of the period from February 8,

2010 through February 22, 2010 is warranted and that the ends of justice served by the

continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18

U.S.C. §3161(h)(7)(A). The failure to grant the requested exclusion of time would deny counsel

for the defendant and for the Government the 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)(7)(B)(iv). 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED:______________ _______________________________________

 THE HONORABLE MARILYN HALL PATEL

United States District Judge 

2/17/2010

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Marilyn H. Patel

Case 3:09-cr-01112-CRB Document 15 Filed 02/18/10 Page 2 of 2