U.S. v. FLORIAN, 8:13CR179. (2013)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20130712960
Visitors: 6
Filed: Jul. 11, 2013
Latest Update: Jul. 11, 2013
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 22, 2013. (Filing No. 22). As explained in the motion, the parties are currently engaged in plea discussions. 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. 22), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 22, 2013. (Filing No. 22). As explained in the motion, the parties are currently engaged in plea discussions. 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. 22), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the H..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 22, 2013. (Filing No. 22). As explained in the motion, the parties are currently engaged in plea discussions. 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. 22), is granted.
2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Senior United States District Judge, in the Special Proceedings Courtroom of the United States Courthouse, Omaha, Nebraska, at 9:00 a.m. on September 3, 2013, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called. Jury selection will be held at commencement of trial.
3) Based upon the showing set forth in the defendant's motion and the representations of counsel, the Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by continuing the trial; and that the purposes served by continuing the trial date in this case outweigh the interest of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial. Accordingly, the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and September 3, 2013, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because despite counsel's due diligence, 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)(1) & (h)(7).
Source: Leagle
