U.S. v. PEITZMEIER, 8:13CR264. (2013)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20130911a29
Visitors: 21
Filed: Sep. 10, 2013
Latest Update: Sep. 10, 2013
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by September 23, 2013. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed o
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by September 23, 2013. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on..
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by September 23, 2013.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE TIME IN WHICH TO FILE PRETRIAL MOTIONS [13] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before September 23, 2013.
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 September 9, 2013 and September 23, 2013, 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)(8)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
