United States v. Miranda-Yepiz, 8:19CR302. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20200113b69
Visitors: 5
Filed: Jan. 10, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 10, 2020
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. Defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by February 24, 2020. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before February 24, 2020.
Summary: ORDER MICHAEL D. NELSON , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. Defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by February 24, 2020. IT IS ORDERED: 1. Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before February 24, 2020. 2..
More
ORDER
MICHAEL D. NELSON, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29]. For good cause shown, I find that the motion should be granted. Defendant will be given an approximate 45-day extension. Pretrial Motions shall be filed by February 24, 2020.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Defendant's Motion for Extension of Time to File Pretrial Motions [29] is granted. Pretrial motions shall be filed on or before February 24, 2020.
2. The ends of justice have been served by granting such motion and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The additional time arising as a result of the granting of the motion, i.e., the time between today's date and February 24, 2020, shall be deemed excludable time in any computation of time under the requirement of the Speedy Trial Act for the reason defendant's counsel required additional time to adequately prepare the case, taking into consideration due diligence of counsel, and the novelty and complexity of this case. The failure to grant additional time might result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A) & (B).
Source: Leagle
