U.S. v. JACKSON, 4:14CR3032. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20140516976
Visitors: 11
Filed: May 15, 2014
Latest Update: May 15, 2014
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has orally moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 34), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to fully review the discovery received before deciding if pretrial motions should be filed. 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 motion to continue, (filing
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge. Defendant has orally moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 34), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to fully review the discovery received before deciding if pretrial motions should be filed. 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 motion to continue, (filing ..
More
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
Defendant has orally moved to continue the pretrial motion deadline, (filing no. 34), because the defendant and defense counsel need additional time to fully review the discovery received before deciding if pretrial motions should be filed. 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 motion to continue, (filing no. 34), is granted.
2) Pretrial motions and briefs shall be filed on or before May 29, 2014.
3) Trial of this case is set to commence on August 18, 2014 before Judge Kopf for a duration of 4 trial days.
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 August 18, 2014, 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
