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

PROP. ORDER EXCL. TIME

CASE NO. CR 09-1101 JSW

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 Ave., Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102

Telephone: (415) 436-7200

Fax: (415) 436-7234

E-Mail: 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.

MARK LEONARD GARCIA,

Defendant.

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CR 09-1101 JSW

[PROPOSED] ORDER EXCLUDING

TIME FROM JANUARY 28, 2010

THROUGH MARCH 25, 2010 FROM

SPEEDY TRIAL ACT COMPUTATION

BASED ON COMPLEX FACTUAL

ISSUES AND EFFECTIVE

PREPARATION OF DEFENSE COUNSEL

Case 3:09-cr-01101-JSW Document 14 Filed 01/29/10 Page 1 of 2 Case3:09-cr-01101-JSW Document13 Filed01/29/10 Page1 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

[PROP.] ORDER EXCL. TIME

CASE NO. CR 09-1101 JSW -2-

The defendant and the government appeared before the Court on January 28, 2010 for a

status conference. The defendant was represented by counsel. The parties represented that the

government had produced approximately 50,000 pages of evidence, including investigative

reports, financial records, and documents obtained through search warrants. The government

represented that it was in the process of producing additional evidence. The government also

represented that it may file a superseding indictment in the case United States v. Scott Feil, et al.,

Case No. CR 09-863, add the defendant in the above-captioned case to United States v. Feil, and

dismiss the charges in the above-captioned case. 

The defendant requested that the Court declare the case factually complex, based on the

nature of the prosecution, specifically the amount of discovery produced and the additional

discovery to be produced. The United States did not object to a finding of complexity. The

defendant requested that the Court exclude time on those grounds, and also based on effective

preparation of counsel. 

The Court, having considered the issue, relying upon the representations of counsel, and

for good cause shown, finds that the nature of the case renders it so factually complex due to the

large number of documents, including financial records, that it is unreasonable to expect

adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings and for trial itself within the otherwise applicable

time limits set forth in the Speedy Trial Act, within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) &

(B)(ii), (iv). The Court further finds that the ends of justice served by excluding the time from

January 28, 2010 through and including March 25, 2010 from computation under the Speedy

Trial Act outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the time from January 28, 2010 through and including March

25, 2010 shall be excluded from computation under the Speedy Trial Act. 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(7)(A) and (B)(ii), (iv). 

DATED: ___________________ ___________________________________

THE HONORABLE JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Case3:09-cr-01101-JSW Document13 Filed01/29/10 Page2 of 2

January 29, 2010

Case 3:09-cr-01101-JSW Document 14 Filed 01/29/10 Page 2 of 2