United States v. Zambrowski, 8:19CR167. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20190925e23
Visitors: 16
Filed: Sep. 24, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2019
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34]. The parties are seeking additional time to negotiate a plea agreement in this matter. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, as to both defendants, now set for October 1, 2019, is continued to November 5, 2019. 2. In accordance with
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34]. The parties are seeking additional time to negotiate a plea agreement in this matter. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, as to both defendants, now set for October 1, 2019, is continued to November 5, 2019. 2. In accordance with ..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34]. The parties are seeking additional time to negotiate a plea agreement in this matter. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that Defendant Wasserburger's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [34] is granted as follows:
1. The jury trial, as to both defendants, now set for October 1, 2019, is continued to November 5, 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 defendants 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 November 5, 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
