U.S. v. VIEYRA, 8:14CR229. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20150220c87
Visitors: 5
Filed: Feb. 19, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 19, 2015
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed motion to continue trial [30] as defendant is currently in treatment and counsel are engaged in plea negotiations. The court finds good cause being shown and the trial will be continued. The defendant has previously complied with NECrimR 12.1(a). IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial now set for February 24, 2015 is continued to April 7, 201
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge. This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed motion to continue trial [30] as defendant is currently in treatment and counsel are engaged in plea negotiations. The court finds good cause being shown and the trial will be continued. The defendant has previously complied with NECrimR 12.1(a). IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial now set for February 24, 2015 is continued to April 7, 2015..
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed motion to continue trial [30] as defendant is currently in treatment and counsel are engaged in plea negotiations. The court finds good cause being shown and the trial will be continued. The defendant has previously complied with NECrimR 12.1(a).
IT IS ORDERED that the motion to continue trial is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial now set for February 24, 2015 is continued to April 7, 2015.
2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the ends of justice will be served by granting this continuance and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Any additional time arising as a result of the granting of this motion, that is, the time between today's date and April 7, 2015, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to grant a continuance would deny counsel for the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv).
Source: Leagle
