United States v. Snyder, 8:19CR162. (2020)
Court: District Court, D. Nebraska
Number: infdco20200203c98
Visitors: 13
Filed: Jan. 31, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 31, 2020
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33]. Counsel needs additional time to conclude investigation and confer with client. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for February 4, 2020, is continued to April 7, 2020. 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the e
Summary: ORDER SUSAN M. BAZIS , Magistrate Judge . This matter is before the court on the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33]. Counsel needs additional time to conclude investigation and confer with client. For good cause shown, IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33] is granted as follows: 1. The jury trial, now set for February 4, 2020, is continued to April 7, 2020. 2. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. 3161(h)(7)(A), the court finds that the en..
More
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, Magistrate Judge.
This matter is before the court on the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33]. Counsel needs additional time to conclude investigation and confer with client. For good cause shown,
IT IS ORDERED that the Defendant's Unopposed Motion to Continue Trial [33] is granted as follows:
1. The jury trial, now set for February 4, 2020, is continued to April 7, 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 April 7, 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).
3. No further continuances will be granted without a hearing before the undersigned magistrate judge.
Source: Leagle
