U.S. v. Hernandez, 8:17CR235. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20180321d74
Visitors: 2
Filed: Mar. 20, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 20, 2018
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's [48] unopposed Motion to Continue Trial. Defendant is currently at an inpatient facility. Counsel is seeking additional time to meet and confer with Defendant regarding a potential plea offer. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [48] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for March 27, 2018, is continued to May 29, 2018. 2. In accor
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's [48] unopposed Motion to Continue Trial. Defendant is currently at an inpatient facility. Counsel is seeking additional time to meet and confer with Defendant regarding a potential plea offer. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [48] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for March 27, 2018, is continued to May 29, 2018. 2. In accord..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Defendant's [48] unopposed Motion to Continue Trial. Defendant is currently at an inpatient facility. Counsel is seeking additional time to meet and confer with Defendant regarding a potential plea offer. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [48] is granted as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for March 27, 2018, is continued to May 29, 2018.
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 May 29, 2018, 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
