Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

USA v. SOROTZKIN, 17-5008 (TJB). (2017)

Court: District Court, D. New Jersey Number: infdco20171212638 Visitors: 7
Filed: Nov. 30, 2017
Latest Update: Nov. 30, 2017
Summary: CONTINUANCE ORDER TONIANNE J. BONGIOVANNI , Magistrate Judge . This matter having come before the Court on the joint application of William E. Fitzpatrick, Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey (by Molly S. Lorber, Assistant U.S. Attorney), and defendant Mordechai Sorotzkin through his attorney, Benjamin Rosenberg, Esq., for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter so that the defendant will have additional time to consult with
More

CONTINUANCE ORDER

This matter having come before the Court on the joint application of William E. Fitzpatrick, Acting United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey (by Molly S. Lorber, Assistant U.S. Attorney), and defendant Mordechai Sorotzkin through his attorney, Benjamin Rosenberg, Esq., for an order granting a continuance of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter so that the defendant will have additional time to consult with counsel, the opportunity to meet with the Government to discuss the charges and review pre-indictment discovery, and so that the parties may discuss a pre-indictment resolution to this matter; and the defendant being aware that he has the right to have the matter submitted to a grand jury within thirty days of the date of his initial appearance pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(b); and the defendant, whose attorney has signed below, having consented to the continuance and waived such right; and this being the fifth continuance sought by the parties, and for good cause shown;

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should be continued for the following reasons:

(1) The defendant, whose attorney has signed below, through his counsel, has requested additional time to consult with counsel and in order to allow the opportunity to meet with the Government to discuss the charges and review pre-indictment discovery;

(2) The United States and the defendant have jointly represented that the parties desire additional time to discuss a pre-indictment resolution to this matter, which would render any subsequent trial of this matter unnecessary; and

(3) Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7), the ends of justice served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS, therefore, on this 30 day of November, 2017,

ORDERED that this action be, and it hereby is, continued from the date hereof through and including January 29, 2018; and it is further

ORDERED that the period from the date hereof through and including January 29, 2018 shall be excludable in computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer