U.S. v. Alonzo-Lopez, 8:17CR375. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20180215d66
Visitors: 7
Filed: Feb. 14, 2018
Latest Update: Feb. 14, 2018
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [55] to file pretrial motions. The Court notes that the aforementioned Motion to Continue was filed out of time, and that Pretrial Motions were due on January 31, 2018. However, for good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted in part. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension.
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [55] to file pretrial motions. The Court notes that the aforementioned Motion to Continue was filed out of time, and that Pretrial Motions were due on January 31, 2018. However, for good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted in part. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension. ..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [55] to file pretrial motions. The Court notes that the aforementioned Motion to Continue was filed out of time, and that Pretrial Motions were due on January 31, 2018. However, for good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted in part. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by April 2, 2018.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME [55] to file pretrial motions is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before April 2, 2018.
2. 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 January 31, 2018 and April 2, 2018, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendant's counsel required 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
