U.S. v. McCROY, 8:15CR247. (2015)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20151116742
Visitors: 6
Filed: Nov. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Nov. 10, 2015
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the motion for an extension of time by defendant Blayne L. McCroy (McCroy) (Filing No. 60). McCroy seeks until November 20, 2015, in which to file pretrial motions in accordance with the progression order. McCroy's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted. IT IS ORDERED: Defendant McCroy's motion for an extension of time (Filin
Summary: ORDER THOMAS D. THALKEN , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the motion for an extension of time by defendant Blayne L. McCroy (McCroy) (Filing No. 60). McCroy seeks until November 20, 2015, in which to file pretrial motions in accordance with the progression order. McCroy's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted. IT IS ORDERED: Defendant McCroy's motion for an extension of time (Filing..
More
ORDER
THOMAS D. THALKEN, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the motion for an extension of time by defendant Blayne L. McCroy (McCroy) (Filing No. 60). McCroy seeks until November 20, 2015, in which to file pretrial motions in accordance with the progression order. McCroy's counsel represents that government's counsel has no objection to the motion. Upon consideration, the motion will be granted.
IT IS ORDERED:
Defendant McCroy's motion for an extension of time (Filing No. 60) is granted. McCroy is given until on or before November 20, 2015, in which to file pretrial motions pursuant to the progression order. 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 November 10, 2015, and November 20, 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 requires 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
