Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

U.S. v. Brown, 8:18CR243. (2019)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20190507a71 Visitors: 14
Filed: May 06, 2019
Latest Update: May 06, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant Podgorski's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [45]. Based on the reasons set forth in the motion, the court finds good cause has been shown and the motion should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant Podgorski's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [45] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, as to both defendants, now set for June 4, 2019, is continued to July 9, 2019. 2. In
More

ORDER

This matter is before the court on Defendant Podgorski's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [45]. Based on the reasons set forth in the motion, the court finds good cause has been shown and the motion should be granted. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant Podgorski's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [45] is granted as follows:

1. The jury trial, as to both defendants, now set for June 4, 2019, is continued to July 9, 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 July 9, 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

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer