U.S. v. PEITHMAN, 4:15CR3091. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20151026b45
Visitors: 11
Filed: Oct. 22, 2015
Latest Update: Oct. 22, 2015
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The government has moved to continue its Rule 16 disclosure deadline, (filing no. 35), because documents seized during a search of an accountant's office pertaining to this case, which were sent to the FDA Documents Center for processing, will not be available to counsel for the government until sometime during the week beginning October 26, 2015. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The government has moved to continue its Rule 16 disclosure deadline, (filing no. 35), because documents seized during a search of an accountant's office pertaining to this case, which were sent to the FDA Documents Center for processing, will not be available to counsel for the government until sometime during the week beginning October 26, 2015. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the ..
More
ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
The government has moved to continue its Rule 16 disclosure deadline, (filing no. 35), because documents seized during a search of an accountant's office pertaining to this case, which were sent to the FDA Documents Center for processing, will not be available to counsel for the government until sometime during the week beginning October 26, 2015. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted.
Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 35), is granted.
2) The government's deadline for disclosing Rule 16 discovery is extended to November 6, 2015.
3) The ends of justice served by granting the motion to continue outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and February 9, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because this case remains "unusual and complex," and continues to be exempted from the time restrictions of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii).
Source: Leagle
