U.S. v. Dortch, 4:18CR3034. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20190424b68
Visitors: 8
Filed: Apr. 23, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 23, 2019
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant's unopposed e-mail motion to continue the status conference, ( Filing No. 138 ), is granted. 2) A status conference will be held before the undersigned magistrate judge at 9:00 a.m. on May 20, 2019 by telephone. All participants shall use the conferencing information provided by the court, (see Filing No. 65 ), to participate in the call to discuss case progression and a potential trial setting. Defendant, defense cou
Summary: ORDER CHERYL R. ZWART , Magistrate Judge . IT IS ORDERED: 1) Defendant's unopposed e-mail motion to continue the status conference, ( Filing No. 138 ), is granted. 2) A status conference will be held before the undersigned magistrate judge at 9:00 a.m. on May 20, 2019 by telephone. All participants shall use the conferencing information provided by the court, (see Filing No. 65 ), to participate in the call to discuss case progression and a potential trial setting. Defendant, defense coun..
More
ORDER
CHERYL R. ZWART, Magistrate Judge.
IT IS ORDERED:
1) Defendant's unopposed e-mail motion to continue the status conference, (Filing No. 138), is granted.
2) A status conference will be held before the undersigned magistrate judge at 9:00 a.m. on May 20, 2019 by telephone. All participants shall use the conferencing information provided by the court, (see Filing No. 65), to participate in the call to discuss case progression and a potential trial setting. Defendant, defense counsel, and counsel for the government shall be present at the conference.
3) The court finds that the time between today's date and May 20, 2019 is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act because although counsel have been diligent, additional time is needed to adequately review this case and failing to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B). Failing to timely object to this order as provided under this court's local rules will be deemed a waiver of any right to later claim the time should not have been excluded under the Speedy Trial Act.
Source: Leagle
