U.S. v. PETERSON, 4:15CR3076. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20160308b66
Filed: Mar. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The government has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 11, 2016. (Filing No. 28). As explained in the motion, a material witness is not available during the current trial setting. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 28), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . The government has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 11, 2016. (Filing No. 28). As explained in the motion, a material witness is not available during the current trial setting. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: 1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 28), is granted. 2) The trial of this case is ..
More
ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
The government has moved to continue the trial currently set for July 11, 2016. (Filing No. 28). As explained in the motion, a material witness is not available during the current trial setting. The motion to continue is unopposed. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court finds the motion should be granted. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) The government's motion to continue, (filing no. 28), is granted.
2) The trial of this case is set to commence before the Honorable Richard G. Kopf, Senior United States District Judge, in Courtroom 1, United States Courthouse, Lincoln, Nebraska, at 9:00 a.m. on July 25, 2016, or as soon thereafter as the case may be called, for a duration of four (4) trial days. Jury selection will be held at commencement of trial.
3) Based upon the showing set forth in the defendant's motion and the representations of counsel, the Court further finds that the ends of justice will be served by continuing the trial; and that the purposes served by continuing the trial date in this case outweigh the interest of the defendant and the public in a speedy trial. Accordingly,
a. the additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, the time between today's date and July 25, 2016, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirements of the Speedy Trial Act, because although counsel have been duly diligent, additional time is needed to adequately prepare this case for trial and failing to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
b. Failing to timely file an objection to this order as provided in the local rules of this court will be deemed a waiver of any right to later claim the time should not have been excluded under the Speedy Trial Act.
Source: Leagle
