U.S. v. CARTER, 7:14-CV-48 (HL). (2015)
Court: District Court, M.D. Georgia
Number: infdco20150316b42
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 11, 2015
Summary: ORDER HUGH LAWSON , Senior District Judge . Before the Court is the joint motion (Doc. 262) of the United States of America and all Defendants requesting that this case, which presently appears on the Court's April 13, 2015 trial calendar, be continued to the next term of Court. Upon consideration of the parties' motion, the Court finds that the ends of justice would be served by the granting of the continuance. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-referenced matter be continued to the next
Summary: ORDER HUGH LAWSON , Senior District Judge . Before the Court is the joint motion (Doc. 262) of the United States of America and all Defendants requesting that this case, which presently appears on the Court's April 13, 2015 trial calendar, be continued to the next term of Court. Upon consideration of the parties' motion, the Court finds that the ends of justice would be served by the granting of the continuance. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-referenced matter be continued to the next ..
More
ORDER
HUGH LAWSON, Senior District Judge.
Before the Court is the joint motion (Doc. 262) of the United States of America and all Defendants requesting that this case, which presently appears on the Court's April 13, 2015 trial calendar, be continued to the next term of Court. Upon consideration of the parties' motion, the Court finds that the ends of justice would be served by the granting of the continuance.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-referenced matter be continued to the next regularly scheduled term of Court for the Valdosta Division of this district, and that any delay occasioned by the continuance be deemed excusable delay pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h). The time for filing motions in this case is also extended to not later than 14 days before the scheduled pretrial conference in this matter.
It is the Court's finding that the ends of justice served by the granting of this continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the Defendants in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A). The Court finds that failure to grant such continuance could result in a miscarriage of justice, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(i), and that failure to grant such continuance would deny counsel for the Defendants and the government the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv).
SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
