Skip navigation

Search

91 results
Page 4 of 5. « Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next »

Article • August 1, 1998 • from P&J August, 1998
U.S. v. Spinner, No. 98-7353 (3rd Cir.) (180 F.3d 514) (June 16, 1999) (Judge Timothy K. Lewis) by The Court stated: "Without alleging an effect on interstate commerce in the first count, then, the indictment in this case was jurisdictionally defective. "When, as in this case, an indictment fails to …
Article • August 1, 1998 • from P&J August, 1998
U.S. v. Brye, No. 97-1094 (10th Cir.) (146 F.3d 1207) (June 16, 1998) (Judge Mary Beck Briscoe) by While court declined to reverse lower court's decision not to grant a downward departure based on a 3-year preindictment delay it did suggest that such a departure would be proper if the …
Article • August 1, 1998 • from P&J August, 1998
U.S. v. Franklin, No. 97-30321 (5th Cir.) (148 F.3d 451) (July 22, 1998) (Judge Jacques L. Jr. Wiener) by Here the Court affirmed as reasonable a 215 day delay in bringing the defendant's to trial while the Government sought to apprehend and prosecute a co-defendant, under the provisions of 18 …
Article • June 1, 1998 • from P&J June, 1998
Lara v. Johnson, No. 97-10034 (5th Cir.) (141 F.3d 239) (May 26, 1998) (Judge Reynaldo G. Garza) by The Court wrote: "The IAD has been adopted by most states (including Texas), and is a congressionally mandated compact, so its interpretation is a question of federal law. Cuyler v. Adams, 449 …
Article • June 1, 1998 • from P&J June, 1998
U.S. v. Paredes-Batista, No. 97-1110 (2nd Cir.) (140 F.3d 367) (March 18, 1998) (Judge Jose A. Cabranes) by Case held that IAD's 180-day speedy trial period was not violated, even though the Government's procedures for processing speedy trial requests was "disturbing.".
Article • May 1, 1998 • from P&J May, 1998
U.S. v. Wilkerson, No. 97-21-CR-ORL-22B (M.D.Fla.) (992 F.Supp. 1358) (February 2, 1998) (Judge Anne C. Conway) by Case held that unexplained delay of 64 days between defendant's arrival in district and first appearance before judge was unnecessary delay that required dismissal of indictment with prejudice.
Article • May 1, 1998 • from P&J May, 1998
U.S. v. Gonzales, No. 96-4204 (10th Cir.) (137 F.3d 1431) (March 4, 1998) (Judge Mary Beck Briscoe) by Case held that the Speedy Trial Act had been violated because an "ends of justice" continuance had been improperly granted. This is a rare case in which the Court held that a …
Article • May 1, 1998 • from P&J May, 1998
U.S. v. Gonzales, No. 96-4204 (10th Cir.) (137 F.3d 1431) (March 4, 1998) (Judge Mary Beck Briscoe) by Case held that the Speedy Trial Act had been violated because an "ends of justice" continuance had been improperly granted.
Article • May 1, 1998 • from P&J May, 1998
U.S. v. Wilkerson, No. 97-21-CR-ORL-22B (M.D.Fla.) (992 F.Supp. 1358) (February 2, 1998) (Judge Anne C. Conway) by Case held that unexplained delay of 64 days between defendant's arrival in district and first appearance before judge was unnecessary delay that required dismissal of indictment with prejudice.
Article • April 1, 1998 • from P&J April, 1998
In Re US Currency, $844,520.00, No. 97-2210 (8th Cir.) (136 F.3d 581) (February 19, 1998) (Per Curiam) by While the Court is this case, by a per curiam order, routinely affirmed the seizue of $844,520 in this case on the grounds that the claimant had failed to file a claim …
Article • March 1, 1998 • from P&J March, 1998
U.S. v. Lopez, No. CR 91-082L (D.R.I.) (985 F.Supp. 59) (November 24, 1997) (Judge Ronald R. Lagueux) by Case held that a 32 month delay in reporting of a stste offense did not preclude the sentencing of a defendant for violation of his supervised release with a sentence to run …
Article • January 1, 1998 • from P&J January, 1998
U.S. v. Shetty, No. 96-50583 (9th Cir.) (130 F.3d 1324) (November 20, 1997) (Judge Thomas G. Nelson) by
Article • January 1, 1998 • from P&J January, 1998
U.S. v. David, No. 95-1522 (2nd Cir.) (131 F.3d 55) (November 25, 1997) (Judge Fred I. Parker) by Case held that a five year delay in prosecution of civil forfeiture did not violate defendant's due process rights.
Article • January 1, 1998 • from P&J January, 1998
U.S. v. Santiago-Becerril, No. 96-1937 (1st Cir.) (130 F.3d 11) (November 20, 1997) (Judge Levin H. Campbell) by
Article • December 1, 1997 • from P&J December, 1997
U.S. v. Jones, No. 96-1438L, No. 41 (2nd Cir.) (129 F.3d 718) (November 19, 1997) (Per Curiam) by Case rejected claim that defendant's transfer from state to federal custody pursuant to writ ad testificandum triggered the Speedy Trial Act. The defendant was transferred from state custody to Federal custody pursuant …
Article • November 1, 1997 • from P&J November, 1997
U.S. v. Lloyd, No. 96-30149 (9th Cir.) (125 F.3d 1263) (September 11, 1997) (Judge Stephen Reinhardt) by Case reversed drug convictions due to violations of Speedy Trial Act because district court erred in granting lengthy continuances based on end of justice exception.
Article • November 1, 1997 • from P&J November, 1997
U.S. v. Lloyd, No. 96-30149 (9th Cir.) (125 F.3d 1263) (September 11, 1997) (Judge Stephen Reinhardt) by In this case, the Ninth Circuit reversed two convictions on the grounds that the defendants' speedy trial rights had been violated. The two defendants were originally indicted in 1992 on a number of …
Article • October 1, 1997 • from P&J October, 1997
U.S. v. Rizzo, No. 96-2002 (1st Cir.) (121 F.3d 794) (August 11, 1997) (Judge Norman H. Stahl) by Citing U.S. v. Saldana, 109 F.3d 100 (1st Cir. 1997), the defendant argued that he should have received a downward departure based on the Government's delay in waiting till he had completed …
Article • September 1, 1997 • from P&J September, 1997
U.S. v. Johnson, No. 96-3337 (10th Cir.) (120 F.3d 1107) (August 6, 1997) (Judge Stephanie K. Seymour) by Here the Tenth Circuit ruled that a continuance granted by the district court violated both the letter and the spirit of the Speedy Trial Act. First it granted the continuance because it …
Article • September 1, 1997 • from P&J September, 1997
U.S. v. Van Someren, No. 96-3665 (8th Cir.) (118 F.3d 1214) (July 3, 1997) (Judge John F. Nangle) by Here the Court held that time spent of plea negotiations is excludable under the Speedy Trial Act as a "proceeding involving the defendant" under § 3161(h)(1).
Page 4 of 5. « Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 | Next »