U.S. v. MURATELLA, 8:14CR220. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20150305b25
Visitors: 18
Filed: Mar. 04, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 04, 2015
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 28-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by March 31, 2015. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before March 31, 2015. 2. The defendant is or
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 28-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by March 31, 2015. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before March 31, 2015. 2. The defendant is ord..
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 28-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by March 31, 2015.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's MOTION TO CONTINUE PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [16] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before March 31, 2015.
2. The defendant is ordered to file the affidavit required by NECrimR 12.1(a) regarding speedy trial as soon as practicable.
3. 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 March 3, 2015 and March 31, 2015, 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
