USA v. Rasgado, 8:17CR125. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20171212b97
Visitors: 32
Filed: Dec. 07, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 07, 2017
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. Counsel is seeking additional time to enter into plea negotiations with the government and to secure the services of a Spanish interpreter. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 12, 2017, is continued to January 16, 2018. 2. In accordance
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. Counsel is seeking additional time to enter into plea negotiations with the government and to secure the services of a Spanish interpreter. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 12, 2017, is continued to January 16, 2018. 2. In accordance ..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. Counsel is seeking additional time to enter into plea negotiations with the government and to secure the services of a Spanish interpreter. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for December 12, 2017, is continued to January 16, 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 January 16, 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
