Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

United States Vs. Macdonald

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Mar 31, 1982

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

60 entries 6 linked 54 unlinked
Show
  1. United States Vs. Marion US Supreme Court · Dec 20, 1971
  2. Smith Vs. Hooey US Supreme Court · Jan 20, 1969
  3. United States Vs. Roberts US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1850
  4. United States Vs. Lara US Supreme Court · Apr 19, 2004
  5. United States Vs. Lovasco US Supreme Court · Jun 09, 1977
  6. Barker Vs. Wingo US Supreme Court · Jun 22, 1972
  7. U.S. 1 (1982) U.S. Supreme Court United States v. MacDonald
    Search
  8. U.S. 1 (1982) United States v. MacDonald
    Search
  9. the August, 1974, convening of the grand jury violated MacDonald's constitutional right to a speedy trial. MacDonald v. United
    Search
  10. denial of a motion to dismiss on Speedy Trial Clause grounds until after the trial had been completed. United States v. MacDonald
    Search
  11. attaches only when a formal criminal charge is instituted and a criminal prosecution begins. In United States v. Marion
    Search
  12. the period between arrest and indictment must be considered in evaluating a Speedy Trial Clause claim. Dillingham v. United
    Search
  13. delay prior to arrest or indictment may give rise to a due process claim under the Fifth Amendment, see United States v. Lovasco
    Search
  14. The Court identified the interests served by the Speedy Trial Clause in United States v. Marion
    Search
  15. Barker v. Wingo
    Search
  16. MacDonald's discharge barred any further military proceedings against him. United States ex rel. Toth v. Quarles
    Search
  17. charges is not included in determining whether the Speedy Trial Clause has been violated. See, e.g., United States v. Hillegas
    Search
  18. Arnold v. McCarthy
    Search
  19. United States v. Martin
    Search
  20. United States v. Bishton
    Search
  21. U.S.App.D.C. 51, 55, 463 F.2d. 887, 891 (1972). The Fifth Circuit reached a seemingly contrary result in United States v. Avalos
    Search
  22. Klopfer v. North
    Search
  23. and reported that the local United States Attorney predicted that indictments would be forthcoming. United States v. Marion
    Search
  24. for Speedy Trial Clause purposes. United States v. MacDonald
    Search
  25. him for that crime. Our cases, to the extent they address the issue, contradict the majority's view. In Klopfer v. North
    Search
  26. has been discharged from custody, warrants application of the speedy trial protection. The analysis in United States v. Marion
    Search
  27. In Barker v. Wingo
    Search
  28. See United States v. Lovasco
    Search
  29. right. I find the question close. However, after examining the four speedy trial right factors enunciated in Barker v. Wingo
    Search
  30. the strength of his efforts is a powerful indication that he has suffered serious personal prejudice. See Barker v. Wingo
    Search
  31. actual prejudice to the defense at trial is not, of course, necessary to demonstrate a speedy trial violation. Moore v. Arizona
    Search
  32. trial purposes. The First, Fifth, Seventh, and Tenth Circuits have all reached this conclusion. See United States v. Cabral
    Search
  33. United States v. Avalos
    Search
  34. United States v. McKim
    Search
  35. Jones v. Morris
    Search
  36. United States v. DeTienne
    Search
  37. United States v. Merrick
    Search
  38. F.2d 1087, 1090 (CA10), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 1023 (1972). See also United States v. Small
    Search
  39. trial, although in fact civilian indictment immediately followed dismissal of military charges). But see United States v. Davis
    Search
  40. opinions the majority cites as support have issued somewhat contradictory signals on this question. See United States v. Lai
    Search
  41. F.2d 665 (CA6), cert. denied sub nom. Williams v. United
    Search
  42. time between dismissal and indictment for speedy trial purposes without discussing contrary opinion in United States v. Martin
    Search
  43. F.2d 1223, 1233, n. 13 (CA9 1980) (leaving question open, and limiting Arnold v. McCarthy
    Search
  44. United States v. Henry
    Search
  45. U.S. Supreme Court United States v. MacDonald
    Search
  46. MacDonald v. United
    Search
  47. In United States v. Marion
    Search
  48. Dillingham v. United
    Search
  49. Toth v. Quarles
    Search
  50. United States v. Hillegas
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial