United States v. Harvey, 8:18CR353. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20191011i45
Visitors: 6
Filed: Oct. 07, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 07, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [43]. Counsel needs additional time due to defendant's remote location and counsel has not been able to meet with the defendant to thoroughly review the voluminous discovery in this matter and prepare for trial. IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [43] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial now set for October 21, 2019, is continued to December 16, 2019. 2
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [43]. Counsel needs additional time due to defendant's remote location and counsel has not been able to meet with the defendant to thoroughly review the voluminous discovery in this matter and prepare for trial. IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [43] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial now set for October 21, 2019, is continued to December 16, 2019. 2...
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [43]. Counsel needs additional time due to defendant's remote location and counsel has not been able to meet with the defendant to thoroughly review the voluminous discovery in this matter and prepare for trial.
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [43] is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial now set for October 21, 2019, is continued to December 16, 2019.
2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the ends of justice will be served by granting this continuance 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 December 16, 2019, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to grant a continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv).
Source: Leagle
