Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. HERRA-HERRA, 8:15CR20. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20150129g69 Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 28, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 28, 2015
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the oral motion of counsel for defendant Ines Rivadeneyra-Herrera (Rivadeneyra-Herrera) for an extension of the pretrial motion deadline. The motion was made during the arraignment on the Indictment on January 28, 2015. Laura Garcia-Hein served as an interpreter in the Spanish language. Rivadeneyra-Herrera agreed to the motion and acknowledged the additional time needed for his motion would be excluded under the calc
More

ORDER

THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.

This matter is before the court on the oral motion of counsel for defendant Ines Rivadeneyra-Herrera (Rivadeneyra-Herrera) for an extension of the pretrial motion deadline. The motion was made during the arraignment on the Indictment on January 28, 2015. Laura Garcia-Hein served as an interpreter in the Spanish language. Rivadeneyra-Herrera agreed to the motion and acknowledged the additional time needed for his motion would be excluded under the calculations under the Speedy Trial Act. The oral motion was granted. The pretrial motion will be extended as to all defendants in this matter.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The motion for an extension of time for discovery and to file pretrial motions is granted. The parties shall have to on or before April 17, 2015, in which to file pretrial motions in accordance with the progression order.

2. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, i.e., from January 28, 2015, and April 17, 2015, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendants' counsel require 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)(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