U.S. v. Valtierra, 8:16CR72. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20160525d83
Visitors: 4
Filed: May 24, 2016
Latest Update: May 24, 2016
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 22-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by June 14, 2016. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before June 14, 2016. 2.
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 22-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by June 14, 2016. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before June 14, 2016. 2. T..
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 22-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by June 14, 2016.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [23] to file pretrial motions is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before June 14, 2016.
2. The defendant is ordered to file the affidavit required by NECrimR 12.1(a) regarding speedy trial as soon as practicable.
3. 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 May 23, 2016 and June 14, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendant's counsel required additional time to adequately prepare the case, taking into consideration due diligence of counsel, and the novelty and complexity of this case. The failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
