U.S. v. Haro, 8:18CR66. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20181030c03
Visitors: 15
Filed: Oct. 29, 2018
Latest Update: Oct. 29, 2018
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [29]. Counsel has a trial conflict with a previously scheduled private matter. Counsel needs additional time to consult with his client regarding a potential trial and to consider his options and review discovery. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [29] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for November 6, 2018,
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [29]. Counsel has a trial conflict with a previously scheduled private matter. Counsel needs additional time to consult with his client regarding a potential trial and to consider his options and review discovery. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [29] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for November 6, 2018, ..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [29]. Counsel has a trial conflict with a previously scheduled private matter. Counsel needs additional time to consult with his client regarding a potential trial and to consider his options and review discovery. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [29] is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for November 6, 2018, is continued to February 4, 2019. No further continuances will be granted without a teleconference with the undersigned magistrate judge.
2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the ends of justice will be served by granting this continuance and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. Any additional time arising as a result of the granting of this motion, that is, the time between today's date and February 4, 2019, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act. Failure to grant a continuance would deny counsel the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B)(iv).
Source: Leagle
