U.S. v. GARDEN, 4:14CR3072. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20151211a03
Visitors: 12
Filed: Dec. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 10, 2015
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The parties have moved to continue the trial currently set for January 4, 2016. (Filing No. 75). As explained in the motion, the parties need additional time to gather and review discovery. 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) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 75), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to co
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The parties have moved to continue the trial currently set for January 4, 2016. (Filing No. 75). As explained in the motion, the parties need additional time to gather and review discovery. 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) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 75), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is set to com..
More
ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
The parties have moved to continue the trial currently set for January 4, 2016. (Filing No. 75). As explained in the motion, the parties need additional time to gather and review discovery. 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) Defendant's motion to continue, (filing no. 75), is granted.
2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Senior United States District Judge, in Courtroom 1, United States Courthouse, Lincoln, Nebraska, at 9:00 a.m. on March 14, 2016, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called, for a duration of four (4) trial days. Jury selection will be held at commencement of trial.
3) Based upon the showing set forth in the defendant's motion and the representations of counsel, the Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by continuing the trial; and that the purposes served by continuing the trial date in this case outweigh the interest of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial. Accordingly, the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and March 14, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because despite counsel's due diligence, additional time is needed to adequately prepare this case for trial and failing to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1) & (h)(7).
Source: Leagle
