U.S. v. FLEURY, 8:13CR63. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20140512f20
Visitors: 21
Filed: Mar. 31, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 31, 2014
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion to extend by defendant Lawrence Fleury (Fleury) (Filing No. 83). Fleury seeks an extension of the pretrial motion deadline. The court held a telephone conference with counsel on March 28, 2014. This deadline has been extended numerous times, and the court finds there is no need for a further extension of the deadline. Accordingly, this matter will be set for trial. The court will grant defendant a continua
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion to extend by defendant Lawrence Fleury (Fleury) (Filing No. 83). Fleury seeks an extension of the pretrial motion deadline. The court held a telephone conference with counsel on March 28, 2014. This deadline has been extended numerous times, and the court finds there is no need for a further extension of the deadline. Accordingly, this matter will be set for trial. The court will grant defendant a continuan..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion to extend by defendant Lawrence Fleury (Fleury) (Filing No. 83). Fleury seeks an extension of the pretrial motion deadline. The court held a telephone conference with counsel on March 28, 2014. This deadline has been extended numerous times, and the court finds there is no need for a further extension of the deadline. Accordingly, this matter will be set for trial. The court will grant defendant a continuance of the trial to May 13, 2014.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Fleury's motion to extend the pretrial motion deadline (Filing No. 83) is denied.
2. Fleury's motion will be considered as a motion to continue trial. Trial of this matter is scheduled for May 13, 2014, before Chief Judge Laurie Smith Camp and a jury. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, i.e., the time between March 31, 2014, and May 13, 2014, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason that defendant's counsel requires additional time to adequately prepare the case. The failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
