U.S. v. Tift, 8:18CR149. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20180627c04
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jun. 26, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 26, 2018
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension to coincide with the extension of time given to co-defendant Gail Tift. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by August 24, 2018. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29] is granted. Pretrial
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension to coincide with the extension of time given to co-defendant Gail Tift. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by August 24, 2018. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29] is granted. Pretrial ..
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 60-day extension to coincide with the extension of time given to co-defendant Gail Tift. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by August 24, 2018.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [29] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before August 24, 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 June 25, 2018, and August 24, 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
