United States v. Arteaga, 8:19CR240. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20190812775
Visitors: 15
Filed: Aug. 09, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 09, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 32-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by September 9, 2019. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before September 9, 2019.
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 32-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by September 9, 2019. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before September 9, 2019. ..
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 32-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by September 9, 2019.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Pretrial Motion Deadline [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before September 9, 2019.
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 today's date and September 9, 2019, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendant's counsel requires 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
