U.S. v. PERICH, 4:14CR3014. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20140424b25
Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 23, 2014
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 42), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to obtain discovery, investigate the case, and consult with experts. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 42), is granted. 2) Pret
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 42), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to obtain discovery, investigate the case, and consult with experts. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 42), is granted. 2) Pretr..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant has moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 42), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to obtain discovery, investigate the case, and consult with experts. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 42), is granted.
2) Pretrial motions and briefs shall be filed on or before June 2, 2014.
3) The telephonic conference to discuss trial scheduling, previously set for May 6, 2014, is continued and will be held on June 10, 2014 at 11:00 a.m. The court will provide conferencing information for the call.
4) The ends of justice served by granting the motion to continue outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and June 2, 2014, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because although counsel have been diligent, additional time is needed to adequately prepare this case for trial and failing to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
