Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

United States v. Braithwaite, 8:18CR216. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20191015e33 Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court for a status conference. Steven Michael Braithwaite was present with his attorney, Clarence E. Mock, III; Adam Thomas Braithwaite was present with his attorney, Stuart J. Dornan; and Nebraska Railcar Cleaning Services, LLC was represented by David A. Houghton. The United States was represented by Krishna S. Dighe and Donald J. Kleine. Following a discussion of the status of discovery, a partial progression of the case
More

ORDER

This matter is before the court for a status conference. Steven Michael Braithwaite was present with his attorney, Clarence E. Mock, III; Adam Thomas Braithwaite was present with his attorney, Stuart J. Dornan; and Nebraska Railcar Cleaning Services, LLC was represented by David A. Houghton. The United States was represented by Krishna S. Dighe and Donald J. Kleine. Following a discussion of the status of discovery, a partial progression of the case was established.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. On or about December 16, 2019 the United States and the defendants shall disclose their experts and provide any reports to the opposing party.

2. On or about January 16, 2020 the United States shall identify any rebuttal experts and provide their reports to defendants.

3. On or about March 16, 2020 the defendants shall file any pretrial motions.

4. On or about March 23, 2020 at 3:00 p.m. a status conference will be held to discuss the progression of the case and possibly set a trial date.

3. The ends of justice have been served by granting the parties' request and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. The additional time from today's date to March 23, 2020 shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because this case remains "unusual and complex," and continues to be exempted from the time restrictions of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 (h)(7)(B)(ii). Failing to timely object to this order as provided under this court's local rules will be deemed a waiver of any right to later claim the time should not have been excluded under the Speedy Trial Act.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer