Opinion
8:23CR124
01-11-2024
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. JEFFREY EDWARDS, Defendant.
ORDER
SUSAN M. BAZIS, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The undersigned magistrate judge held a telephone status conference with the attorneys regarding the progression of this case. Defendant made an Oral Motion to Continue the Telephone Status Conference because defense counsel needs additional time to review the extensive discovery in this case. The Oral Motion to Continue is unopposed. Based on the comments of counsel on the telephone conference, the court finds Defendant's Unopposed Oral Motion to Continue the Telephone Status Conference should be granted. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED:
1) Defendant's Unopposed Oral Motion to Continue the Telephone Status Conference is granted.
2) The Telephone Status Conference with counsel to discuss the progression of this case is continued to April 17, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. before the undersigned magistrate judge. Counsel for the parties shall use Restricted Order [20] for conference connection instructions to participate in the call.
3) 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 17, 2024, 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). Failing to timely object to this order as provided under this court's local rules will be deemed a waiver of any right to later claim the time should not have been excluded under the Speedy Trial Act.