U.S. v. FREEMONT, 8:16CR277. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20161118c91
Visitors: 23
Filed: Nov. 17, 2016
Latest Update: Nov. 17, 2016
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's motion for a 90-day extension of time in which to file pretrial motions [68]. Upon review of the file, the court finds that a 45-day extension should be granted. IT IS ORDERED that the UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [68] is granted, in part, as follows: 1. The deadline for filing pretrial motions is extended to January 17, 2017. 2. Defendant is ordered to file the affidav
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's motion for a 90-day extension of time in which to file pretrial motions [68]. Upon review of the file, the court finds that a 45-day extension should be granted. IT IS ORDERED that the UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [68] is granted, in part, as follows: 1. The deadline for filing pretrial motions is extended to January 17, 2017. 2. Defendant is ordered to file the affidavi..
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's motion for a 90-day extension of time in which to file pretrial motions [68]. Upon review of the file, the court finds that a 45-day extension should be granted.
IT IS ORDERED that the UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [68] is granted, in part, as follows:
1. The deadline for filing pretrial motions is extended to January 17, 2017.
2. Defendant is ordered to file the affidavit required by Rule 16(c), Fed. R. Cr. P. and NE. Crim. R. 12.1 forthwith.
3. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A), the court finds that the ends of justice will be served by granting this motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Any additional time arising as a result of the granting of this motion, that is, the time between today's date and January 17, 2017, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason that 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)(8)(A) & (B)(iv).
Source: Leagle
