SHARRATT v. MURTHA

Filing 50

SHARRATT v. MURTHA

Doc. 50

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. TONY MARCELLUS FREDERICKSON ) ) ) ) )

Criminal No. 07-368

ORDER OF COURT AND NOW, to-wit, this ______ day of June, 2009, upon 16th consideration of the within Motion to Extend the Time for Filing Pretrial Motions, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that said motion be and the same hereby is, GRANTED; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the delay resulting from this extension of time be deemed excludable delay under the Speedy Trial Act 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq. Specifically, the court

finds that the ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant to a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), since, for the reasons stated in defendant's motion, the failure to grant such continuance would deny counsel for the defendant reasonable time necessary for effective preparation, taking into account the exercise of due diligence, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(B)(iv);

Dockets.Justia.com

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any pretrial motions referred to in Local Criminal Rule 12.1 are due on or before August 25, 2009.

/s/ _________________________________ __ Joy Flowers Conti Joy Flowers Conti United States District Judge cc: Counsel of Record