Search for: ""Barker v. Wingo" OR "407 U.S. 514""
Results 1 - 20
of 31
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Nov 2022, 1:34 pm
” (U.S. v. [read post]
3 Nov 2022, 8:35 am
State v. [read post]
19 Oct 2021, 12:11 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972). [read post]
20 May 2021, 10:38 am
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) (the length of delay; the reason for the delay; the defendant’s assertion of his right; and prejudice to the defendant), the Court of Appeals concluded that there was no speedy trial violation. [read post]
22 Oct 2020, 7:17 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), the Court of Appeals agreed. [read post]
8 Mar 2019, 8:08 am
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 (1972). [read post]
4 Mar 2019, 3:45 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 515 (1972). [read post]
31 May 2017, 8:11 am
Barker, 407 U.S. at 530. 2. [read post]
21 Feb 2017, 9:12 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972). [read post]
18 Mar 2015, 12:18 pm
Wingo, 407 U.s. 514, 33 L.Ed.2d 101, 92 S.Ct. 2182 (1972). [read post]
3 Jun 2014, 12:52 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), using four factors to determine whether there was a violation of Velazquez’s right to a speedy trial: (1) the length of the delay before the trial, (2) the reason for the delay, including a consideration of whether the government was to blame, (3) the extent to which the defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial and (4) the amount of prejudice suffered by the defendant. [read post]
20 Apr 2014, 9:06 am
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972): (1) length of delay; (2) reason for delay; (3) extent defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial; and, (4) prejudice to defendant caused by the delay. [read post]
6 May 2013, 7:44 am
Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932). [read post]
1 Apr 2013, 7:34 am
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) as if the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial and the Art. 11 right to a speedy trial is the same right. [read post]
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… [read post]
9 Jul 2011, 11:37 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) (addressing the right to a speedy trial). [read post]
8 Jul 2011, 1:09 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530 (1972). [read post]
7 Jul 2011, 7:12 am
Wingo (407 U.S. 514, 530 (1972)) for Sixth Amendment speedy trial violations (the majority found that a delay of only 71 days did not trigger the full analysis). [read post]
6 May 2010, 2:02 pm
Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) and Doggett v. [read post]
23 Feb 2010, 9:55 am
WINGO, 407 U.s. 514 (1972) AND DOGGETT v. [read post]