U.S. v. SIDIE, 8:14CR225. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20140822b13
Visitors: 21
Filed: Aug. 21, 2014
Latest Update: Aug. 21, 2014
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on motion of defendant James Pettry (Pettry) for an extension of time to file pretrial motions (Filing No. 58). Pettry seeks an additional thirty days in which to file pretrial motions. The motion will be granted upon condition that Pettry file the affidavit required by NECrimR 12.1(a) and paragraph 9 of the Progression Order on or before August 27, 2014. The pretrial motion deadline will be extended as to all defendant
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on motion of defendant James Pettry (Pettry) for an extension of time to file pretrial motions (Filing No. 58). Pettry seeks an additional thirty days in which to file pretrial motions. The motion will be granted upon condition that Pettry file the affidavit required by NECrimR 12.1(a) and paragraph 9 of the Progression Order on or before August 27, 2014. The pretrial motion deadline will be extended as to all defendants..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on motion of defendant James Pettry (Pettry) for an extension of time to file pretrial motions (Filing No. 58). Pettry seeks an additional thirty days in which to file pretrial motions. The motion will be granted upon condition that Pettry file the affidavit required by NECrimR 12.1(a) and paragraph 9 of the Progression Order on or before August 27, 2014. The pretrial motion deadline will be extended as to all defendants in this matter.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Pettry's motion for an extension of time to file pretrial motions (Filing No. 58) is granted.
2. ALL DEFENDANTS in this matter are given until on or before September 22, 2014, in which to file pretrial motions pursuant to the progression order. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motions, i.e., the time between August 21, 2014, and September 22, 2014, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendants' counsel require 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)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle