Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. TAYLOR, 4:11CR3101. (2012)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20120203964 Visitors: 14
Filed: Feb. 02, 2012
Latest Update: Feb. 02, 2012
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. The defendant has requested to set a change of plea hearing, and consents to having the hearing conducted before the undersigned magistrate judge. The motion will be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that: 1. The defendant's request to set a change of plea hearing is granted. 2. A hearing on the defendant's anticipated plea of guilty is scheduled before Magistrate Judge Zwart on the 10th day of February, 2012, at the hour of 10:30 a
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.

The defendant has requested to set a change of plea hearing, and consents to having the hearing conducted before the undersigned magistrate judge. The motion will be granted.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The defendant's request to set a change of plea hearing is granted. 2. A hearing on the defendant's anticipated plea of guilty is scheduled before Magistrate Judge Zwart on the 10th day of February, 2012, at the hour of 10:30 a.m., in Courtroom No. 2, United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 100 Centennial Mall North, Lincoln, Nebraska. 3. The defendant, his counsel, and counsel for the government shall appear at this hearing. 4. On or before the date set for the plea proceeding, counsel for plaintiff and for defendant shall provide to the assigned probation officer their respective versions of the offense for purposes of preparing the presentence investigation report. 5. The ends of justice served by granting defendant's motion to set a change of plea hearing 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 the anticipated plea of guilty, shall be deemed excluded in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, for the reason that defendant's counsel requires additional time to adequately prepare the case, taking into consideration due diligence of counsel, the novelty and complexity of the case, and the fact that the failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7). 6. As to defendant Taylor, his motion to suppress, (filing no. 43), is denied as moot, but without prejudice to re-filing if the defendant's anticipated plea of guilty is not accepted.
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