USA v. Bartels et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
XAVIER RASHAAD BLANTON,
Defendant.
4:24CR3085
ORDER
A telephone status conference was held today. Defendant had moved to continue the
change of plea hearing (Filing No. 91), because Defendant needs additional time to consider and
decide whether to enter a guilty plea or go to trial. The motion to continue is unopposed. During
the status call, Defendant requested the change of plea hearing be pulled off the calendar at this
time and today’s status call be continued for approximately thirty days while Defendant makes
this decision. Based on the showing set forth in the motion, the court deems Defendant’s motion
to continue the plea hearing moot and finds good cause to grant Defendant’s motion to continue
the status call by thirty days. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED:
1) 	Defendant’s motion to continue, (Filing No. 91), is deemed moot. Defendant’s oral
request to continue the status call is granted.
2) 	A telephonic conference with counsel will be held before the undersigned
magistrate judge at 2:00 p.m. on December 3, 2025 to discuss setting any change
of plea hearing or the date of the jury trial. Counsel for all parties shall use the
conferencing instructions provided by the court to participate in the call.
3) 	In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), and with the consent of Defendant,
the court finds that the ends of justice will be served by granting this continuance
and outweigh the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial. Any
additional time arising as a result of the granting of this motion, this is, the time
between today’s date and December 3, 2025 shall be deemed excludable time in
any computation of time under the requirements 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.
Dated this 29 th day of October, 2024.
BY THE COURT:
s/Jacqueline M. DeLuca
United States Magistrate Judge
4:24-cr-03085-SMB-JMD Doc # 101 Filed: 10/29/25 Page 1 of 1 - Page ID #
<pageID>