U.S. v. Curl, 8:15CR302. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20160527c42
Visitors: 10
Filed: May 26, 2016
Latest Update: May 26, 2016
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant Kurke Curl (Curl) (Filing No. 26). Curl seeks a continuance of the trial of this matter which was scheduled for May 31, 2016. Curl's counsel represents Curl consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act. Curl's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant Kurke Curl (Curl) (Filing No. 26). Curl seeks a continuance of the trial of this matter which was scheduled for May 31, 2016. Curl's counsel represents Curl consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act. Curl's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion...
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion to continue by defendant Kurke Curl (Curl) (Filing No. 26). Curl seeks a continuance of the trial of this matter which was scheduled for May 31, 2016. Curl's counsel represents Curl consents to the motion and acknowledges he understands the additional time may be excludable time for the purposes of the Speedy Trial Act. Curl's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Curl's motion to continue trial (Filing No. 26) is granted.
2. Trial of this matter is re-scheduled for July 25, 2016, before Senior Judge Joseph F. Bataillon and a jury. 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 26, 2016, and July 25, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason that defendant's counsel requires additional time to adequately prepare the 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
