U.S. v. DUE, 8:12CR344. (2014)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20140527e39
Visitors: 4
Filed: May 23, 2014
Latest Update: May 23, 2014
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Randall David Due (Due) for a continuance of trial and for the issuance of subpoenas (Filing No. 384). On May 19, 2014, Judge Bataillon committed Due to the custody of the Attorney General for the purposes of a competency examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4241 (Filing No. 382). As such, the trial scheduled for May 27, 2014, is canceled and will be rescheduled following a determination of Du
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Randall David Due (Due) for a continuance of trial and for the issuance of subpoenas (Filing No. 384). On May 19, 2014, Judge Bataillon committed Due to the custody of the Attorney General for the purposes of a competency examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 4241 (Filing No. 382). As such, the trial scheduled for May 27, 2014, is canceled and will be rescheduled following a determination of Due..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion of defendant Randall David Due (Due) for a continuance of trial and for the issuance of subpoenas (Filing No. 384).
On May 19, 2014, Judge Bataillon committed Due to the custody of the Attorney General for the purposes of a competency examination pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241 (Filing No. 382). As such, the trial scheduled for May 27, 2014, is canceled and will be rescheduled following a determination of Due's competency pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4247. Accordingly, Due's motion to continue trial is denied without prejudice.
Likewise, Due's request for subpoenas is denied without prejudice pending the determination of Due's competency. If determined competent to stand trial, subpoenas to testify at trial may be issued pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(b) but only after an ex parte showing that the witness' presence is necessary for an adequate defense.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
