United States v. Patwary

Full title: UNITED STATES v. MOHAMMED PATWARY

Court: United States District Court, D. New Jersey

Date published: Jul 28, 2021

Mag 21-1173 (D.N.J. Jul. 28, 2021)

Opinion

Mag 21-1173

07-28-2021

UNITED STATES v. MOHAMMED PATWARY

Honorable Anthony R. Mautone United States Magistrate Judge

ORDER REGARDING USE OF VIDEO CONFERENCING/TET, F, CONFERFNCTNG

Honorable Anthony R. Mautone United States Magistrate Judge

In accordance with Fed. R. Crim. P. 43(b)(2) and Standing Order 2020-06, this Court finds:

[X] That the Defendant (or the Juvenile) has consented to the use of video teleconferencing/teleconferencing to conduct the proceeding(s) held today, after consultation with counsel; and

[X] That the proceeding(s) to be held today cannot be further delayed without serious harm to the interests of justice, for the following specific reasons:

1. COVID pandemic, 2. Inability to conduct in-person hearing for indefinite period, and

3. Consent of defendant.

Accordingly, the proceeding(s) held on this date may be conducted by:

[X] Video Teleconferencing

[ ] Teleconferencing, because video teleconferencing is not reasonably available for the following reason:

[ ] The Defendant (or the Juvenile) is detained at a facility lacking video teleconferencing capability.

[ ] Other: