Search for: "Wingo v. State"
Results 41 - 60
of 91
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
15 Mar 2012, 2:03 pm
In Peter's Excellent Motion to Dismiss he argued that Barker v Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) was controlling and that the following factors must be considered:1. length of delay - nearly four years, any time over one year between indictment and arrest is presumptively prejudicial2. reason for the delay - here government negligence to move the case forward and even gained a tactical advantage because the Defendant no longer had possible witnesses available for his defense.3. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 12:00 pm
Wingo. [read post]
13 Jan 2012, 9:20 am
Wingo. [read post]
9 Jul 2011, 11:37 pm
See United States v. [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:09 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 (1972). [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 7:12 am
” (Dissent op. at 2) (citing United States v. [read post]
26 May 2011, 3:55 pm
Wingo (1972), and applied by our New Jersey Supreme Court in State v. [read post]
27 Jan 2011, 5:02 am
In Barker v. [read post]
27 Oct 2010, 11:53 pm
Judge William Alsup stated that under Barker v. [read post]
22 Oct 2010, 6:15 pm
United States v. [read post]
13 Jul 2010, 5:09 am
In United States v. [read post]
1 Jul 2010, 5:58 pm
Wingo. [read post]
14 May 2010, 7:59 am
United States v. [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:02 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) and Doggett v. [read post]
24 Feb 2010, 7:31 pm
In State v. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 9:55 am
WINGO, 407 U.s. 514 (1972) AND DOGGETT v. [read post]
21 Dec 2009, 7:57 am
In a rare reversal of a district court's speedy trial decision, the Third Circuit in United States v. [read post]
15 Dec 2009, 7:42 am
STATE V. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 10:33 am
Soto and United States v. [read post]
9 Oct 2009, 11:54 am
Moreover, this question already was addressed in United States v. [read post]
