U.S. v. RUSSELL, 4:12CR3042. (2012)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20120705a20
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jul. 03, 2012
Latest Update: Jul. 03, 2012
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. The government has moved to continue the status conference, (filing no. 13), because counsel for the government was unexpectedly called out of town on another matter. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 13), is granted. 2) The status conference is continued and will be held at 11:
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. The government has moved to continue the status conference, (filing no. 13), because counsel for the government was unexpectedly called out of town on another matter. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 13), is granted. 2) The status conference is continued and will be held at 11:0..
More
ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
The government has moved to continue the status conference, (filing no. 13), because counsel for the government was unexpectedly called out of town on another matter. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 13), is granted.
2) The status conference is continued and will be held at 11:00 a.m. on July 17, 2012 before the undersigned magistrate judge in Courtroom 2, United States Courthouse and Federal Building, 100 Centennial Mall North, Lincoln, Nebraska.
3) The defendants, defense counsel, and counsel for the government shall attend.
4) The ends of justice served by granting the motion to continue outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, and the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and July 17, 2012, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because this case remains "unusual and complex," and continues to be exempted from the time restrictions of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(B)(ii) because it would be unreasonable for the court to require counsel and the parties to be ready for trial within the deadlines imposed by the Act.
Source: Leagle
