U.S. v. SANCHEZ, 16CR73. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20160602e27
Visitors: 14
Filed: Jun. 01, 2016
Latest Update: Jun. 01, 2016
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant Sherri Queen's unopposed motion to continue trial [39] as counsel indicates that investigation and plea negotiations are ongoing for all three defendants. The defendant has complied with NECrimR 12.1(a). For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, for all defendants, currently set for June 14, 2016 is continued to August 9, 2016. 2
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant Sherri Queen's unopposed motion to continue trial [39] as counsel indicates that investigation and plea negotiations are ongoing for all three defendants. The defendant has complied with NECrimR 12.1(a). For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, for all defendants, currently set for June 14, 2016 is continued to August 9, 2016. 2...
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant Sherri Queen's unopposed motion to continue trial [39] as counsel indicates that investigation and plea negotiations are ongoing for all three defendants. The defendant has complied with NECrimR 12.1(a). For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial, for all defendants, currently set for June 14, 2016 is continued to August 9, 2016.
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 August 9, 2016 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 for the defendant 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
