U.S. v. Diaz, 8:16CR12. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20160328b96
Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 25, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 25, 2016
Summary: ORDER F. A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . The defendant, Ruben Arredondo Diaz, has moved to continue the trial (Filing No. 18). The motion to continue is unopposed by counsel for the Government. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant Ruben Arredondo Diaz's motion to continue trial, (filing no. 18), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable John M. Gerrard,
Summary: ORDER F. A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . The defendant, Ruben Arredondo Diaz, has moved to continue the trial (Filing No. 18). The motion to continue is unopposed by counsel for the Government. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant Ruben Arredondo Diaz's motion to continue trial, (filing no. 18), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable John M. Gerrard, ..
More
ORDER
F. A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
The defendant, Ruben Arredondo Diaz, has moved to continue the trial (Filing No. 18). The motion to continue is unopposed by counsel for the Government. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Defendant Ruben Arredondo Diaz's motion to continue trial, (filing no. 18), is granted.
2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable John M. Gerrard, United States District Judge, in Courtroom #4 of the United States Courthouse, Omaha, Nebraska, at 9:00 a.m. on May 9, 2016, for two trial days, 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 representation 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 May 9, 2016, 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)(6) & (h)(7).
Source: Leagle
