Joint Motion to Continue Motion Hearing — U.S. v. Bhakta, 3:21-cr-03352 (S.D. Cal.), Dkt. 37

Summary

Joint Motion to Continue Motion Hearing, filed 08/10/22 as Document 37 in Case 3:21-cr-03352, Southern District of California, in the case against Denny Bhakta. The parties ask to continue the Motion Hearing and Trial Setting from August 12, 2022, at 1:30 p.m., to October 21, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. before the Honorable Janis L. Sammartino, with time excluded under the Speedy Trial Act. The first reason given is that counsel for the Defendant has sustained an injury that makes it painful to type or write and dangerous to travel to Court. The other reasons are that discovery motions have been filed and that, due to the volume of discovery, there have been prior continuances. The signature lines read s/ Sandra Resnick and s/Eric Olah.

Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used

Full text

Text recognized from a scanned document; may contain errors.

SANDRA RESNICK
California State Bar No. 89901
270 East Douglas Avenue

El Cajon, California 92020
Telephone: iy 19) 401- 4067
Pace miles (619) 442-7439
sresn@cox.net

Attorney for Denny Bhakta

Plaintiff,
v.
DENNY BHAKTA,
Defendant.

be 3:21-cr-03352-JLS Document 37 Filed 08/10/22 PagelD.121 Page1of3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7).

miscarriage of justice.

IT IS HEREBY JOINTLY MOVED by the parties that the Motion
Hearing and Trial Setting currently scheduled for August 12, 2022, at 1:30 p.m.
be continued to October 21, 2022, at 1:30 p.m. before the Honorable Janis L.

Sammartino. The parties also jointly move to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18

Section 3161(h) excludes certain periods of time in calculating the 70 days. That
includes delay resulting from a continuance if the court finds “the ends of justice served by
taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.”
18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The court must “set [] forth ... either orally or in writing, its

reasons” for the finding. Id. The court “shall consider” the following factors, “among others”:

(i) Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in the proceeding would
be likely to make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a

(ii) Whether the case is so unusual or so complex, due to the number of

CASE NO.: 21CR3352-JLS
Hon. JANIS L. SAMMARTINO

JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE
MOTION HEARING
chbe 3:21-cr-03352-JLS Document 37 Filed 08/10/22 PagelD.122 Page 2 of 3

1 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
2 pretrial proceedings or for the trial itself within the time limits established by
this section.
3
4 (iv) Whether the failure to grant such a continuance in a case which, taken
5 as a whole, is not so unusual or so complex as to fall within clause (ii), would
deny the defendant reasonable time to obtain counsel, would unreasonably
6 deny the defendant or the Government continuity of counsel, or would deny
counsel for the defendant or the attorney for the Government the reasonable
7 time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the existence of
due diligence.
8
9 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B). “No continuance under [this provision] shall be granted because of
10 general congestion of the court’s calendar, or lack of diligent preparation or failure to obtain
HW available witnesses on the part of the attorney for the Government.” U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(C).
2 The ends of justice served by granting the requested continuance outweigh the best
i3 interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, for the following reasons:
14 a. Counsel for the Defendant has sustained an injury which makes it painful to
type or write and dangerous to travel to Court. The estimated recovery time is 6-8
15
weeks.
16
b. Discovery motions have been filed.
17
c. The parties seek to continue the hearing until October of 2022.
18
d. The parties have exercised due diligence. For the reasons above, failure to
19
grant the requested continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for
effective preparation and result in a miscarriage of justice.
a e. Due to the volume of discovery, there have been prior continuances of the
an Motion Hearing/Trial Setting in this case.
a Counsel for defendant represents that she has discussed the need for this
24 continuance with Mr. Bhakta, who is out of custody on bond. Mr. Bhakta agrees to and
25 joins in the request for this continuance.
26 The parties therefore jointly move for a continuance and to exclude time under the
27 Speedy Trial Act. The parties agree the period of delay excluded spans from the filing of this
28
2 -JLS
JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE MOTION HEARING
SH N DWN BR WwW pO we

10
11
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
lk
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ase 3:21-cr-03352-JLS Document 37 Filed 08/10/22 PagelD.123 Page 3of3

joint motion, U.S.C. § 3 161(h)(1)(D), until the new date for the hearing.

Respectfully submitted,

DATED: August 10, 2022, s/ Sandra Resnick
Attorney for Mr. Bhakta

DATED: August 10, 2022, s/Eric Olah
Assistant United States Attorney

3

-JLS

JOINT MOTION TO CONTINUE MOTION HEARING


File and source

File

37.pdf

Size

1,010,864 bytes

SHA-256

499bbadf59d4a533a34c0649db4816d5eb0c7378d4f97f7aa6732152c087d3d2

Our copy

37.pdf

Original

No public link identified.