U.S. v. MORRIS, 8:16CR277. (2016)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20161206b88
Visitors: 15
Filed: Dec. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by January 17, 2017. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before January 17, 2017. 2
Summary: ORDER F.A. GOSSETT, III , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by January 17, 2017. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before January 17, 2017. 2...
More
ORDER
F.A. GOSSETT, III, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by January 17, 2017.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND PRETRIAL MOTION DEADLINE [90] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before January 17, 2017.
2. 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 December 3, 2016 and January 17, 2017, 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
