U.S. v. Rodriguez-Torrez, 8:17CC286. (2018)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20181108k87
Visitors: 3
Filed: Nov. 05, 2018
Latest Update: Nov. 05, 2018
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [288]. The government has recently added another individual to the case and counsel have been in communication regarding the trial date. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [288] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 4, 2018, is continued to February 25, 2019 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3161
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [288]. The government has recently added another individual to the case and counsel have been in communication regarding the trial date. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [288] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 4, 2018, is continued to February 25, 2019 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3161(..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [288]. The government has recently added another individual to the case and counsel have been in communication regarding the trial date. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [288] is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for December 4, 2018, is continued to February 25, 2019
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 25, 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
