Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. CRISPIN-GOMEZ, 4:13CR3003. (2013)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20130605b25 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jun. 04, 2013
Latest Update: Jun. 04, 2013
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 19), and the trial setting, (filing no. 20), because defense counsel is out of the country at this time, needs additional time to review this case and confer with the defendant before deciding if pretrial motions should be filed, and the parties are engaged in plea discussions. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the co
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.

Defendant has moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 19), and the trial setting, (filing no. 20), because defense counsel is out of the country at this time, needs additional time to review this case and confer with the defendant before deciding if pretrial motions should be filed, and the parties are engaged in plea discussions. 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) Defendant's motions to continue, (filing nos. 19 and 20), are granted. 2) Pretrial motions and briefs shall be filed on or before August 2, 2013. 3) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable John M. Gerrard, United States District Judge, in Courtroom 1, United States Courthouse, Lincoln, Nebraska, at 9:00 a.m. on August 27, 2013, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called, for a duration of four (4) trial days. Jury selection will be held at commencement of trial. 4) The ends of justice served by granting the motions 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 motions, the time between today's date and August 27, 2013, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because despite counsel's due diligence, additional time is needed to adequately prepare this case for trial and failing to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
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