United States v. Wilson, 8:19CR236. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20191212b45
Visitors: 16
Filed: Dec. 11, 2019
Latest Update: Dec. 11, 2019
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. A potential plea agreement has been reached and counsel needs additional time to complete research regarding an issue that impacts important sentencing issues. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 17, 2019 is continued to March 3, 2020. 2. In accorda
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. A potential plea agreement has been reached and counsel needs additional time to complete research regarding an issue that impacts important sentencing issues. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted, as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for December 17, 2019 is continued to March 3, 2020. 2. In accordan..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the defendant's unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [27]. A potential plea agreement has been reached and counsel needs additional time to complete research regarding an issue that impacts important sentencing issues. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the Motion to Continue Trial [27] is granted, as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for December 17, 2019 is continued to March 3, 2020.
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 March 3, 2020, 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
