U.S. v. RODRIGUEZ, 8:17CR210. (2017)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20170724902
Visitors: 7
Filed: Jul. 18, 2017
Latest Update: Jul. 18, 2017
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by August 1, 2017. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by August 1, 2017. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before ..
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 14-day extension. Pretrial motions shall be filed by August 1, 2017.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's Motion for Enlargement of Time in Which to File Pretrial Motions [34] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before August 1, 2017.
2. Defendant is ordered to file the affidavit required by Rule 16(c), Fed. R. Cr. P. and NE. Crim. R. 12.1 forthwith.
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 July 18, 2017 and August 1, 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 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)(8)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
