U.S. v. Ringland, 8:17CR289. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20180406d88
Visitors: 3
Filed: Apr. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2018
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 7-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by April 11, 2018. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be fi
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 7-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by April 11, 2018. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be fil..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. The defendant will be given an approximate 7-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by April 11, 2018.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's UNOPPOSED MOTION TO EXTEND THE PRETRIAL MOTIONS DEADLINE FOR SEVEN DAYS [45] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before April 11, 2018.
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 April 4, 2018 and April 11, 2018, 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)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
