United States v. Cazarez, 8:19CR124. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20190813c90
Visitors: 10
Filed: Aug. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Aug. 12, 2019
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20]. Counsel seeks additional time to consult with the defendant who was recently sentenced in Dakota County District Court. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for August 13, 2019, is continued to October 29, 2019. 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C.
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20]. Counsel seeks additional time to consult with the defendant who was recently sentenced in Dakota County District Court. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for August 13, 2019, is continued to October 29, 2019. 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. ..
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20]. Counsel seeks additional time to consult with the defendant who was recently sentenced in Dakota County District Court. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [20] is granted as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for August 13, 2019, is continued to October 29, 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 October 29, 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
