Source: http://ca.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20101012_0001314.NCA.htm/qx
Timestamp: 2016-12-10 14:39:02
Document Index: 349377437

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 3161', '§ 3161', '§ 3161', '§ 3161', '§ 3161', '§ 3161']

| United States v. Obaid
United States v. Obaid
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, PLAINTIFF,v.AHMED MOHAMMED OBAID DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Donna Ryu United States Magistrate Judge
STIPULATED ORDER EXCLUDING TIME UNDER THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT
For the reasons stated by the parties on the record on October 6, 2010, the Court excludes time under the Speedy Trial Act from October 6, 2010 to November 2, 2010 and finds that the ends of justice served by the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court makes this finding and bases this continuance on the following factor(s):
Failure to grant a continuance would be likely to result in a miscarriage of justice. See 8 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i).
The case is so unusual or so complex, due to [check applicable reasons] the number of defendants, _____ the nature of the prosecution, or _____ the existence of novel questions of fact or law, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or the trial itself within the time limits established by this section. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii).
Failure to grant a continuance would deny the defendant reasonable time to obtain counsel, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
Failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant continuity of counsel, given counsel's other scheduled case commitments, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
x Failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence.
See 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).