Filed: Feb. 29, 2016
Latest Update: Feb. 29, 2016
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the consent motion to extend pretrial motions deadline (Filing No. 91). Counsel for Brian Robinson represents all defendants' counsel of record and counsel for the government agree to the motion. Brian Robinson has filed a declaration that he agrees to the motion and understands the time allowed for the motion will be excluded from computations under Speedy Trial calculations. Upon consideration, the motion will
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the consent motion to extend pretrial motions deadline (Filing No. 91). Counsel for Brian Robinson represents all defendants' counsel of record and counsel for the government agree to the motion. Brian Robinson has filed a declaration that he agrees to the motion and understands the time allowed for the motion will be excluded from computations under Speedy Trial calculations. Upon consideration, the motion will ..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the consent motion to extend pretrial motions deadline (Filing No. 91). Counsel for Brian Robinson represents all defendants' counsel of record and counsel for the government agree to the motion. Brian Robinson has filed a declaration that he agrees to the motion and understands the time allowed for the motion will be excluded from computations under Speedy Trial calculations. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The consent motion to extend pretrial motions deadline (Filing No. 91) is granted.
2. All defendants shall have to on or before March 10, 2016, to file any motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a warrantless traffic stop, arrest and searches.
3. All defendants shall have to on or before April 29, 2016, to file any other pretrial motions apart from a motion as set forth in paragraph 2 above.
4. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, i.e., the time between February 29, 2016, and April 29, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendants' counsel require additional time to adequately prepare the case, taking into consideration due diligence of counsel, and the novelty and complexity of this case. The failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).