[407 (1937). U.S. 458, 464 18 [407 Barker appealed his conviction to the Kentucky Court of Appeals, relying in part on his speedy trial claim. The court should assess such factors as the length of and reason for the delay, the defendant's assertion of his right, and prejudice to the defendant. Arizona App. [12]. It would also allow a court to weigh the frequency and force of the objections as opposed to attaching significant weight to a purely pro forma objection. Footnote 12 Spell. The end racial discrimination in jury selection, peremptory challenges, for both sides needs to be eliminated. [ Experience the best destinations at really low prices, get there on time and feel all of our #ModoWingo. U.S., at 120 See cases cited in n. 33, supra. Footnote 4 2182]. In February 1963, the first term of court following Manning's final conviction, the Commonwealth moved to set Barker's trial for March 19. U.S. 514, 516] Because the Court broadly assays the factors going into constitutional judgments under the speedy trial provision, it is appropriate to emphasize that one of the major purposes of the provision is to guard against inordinate delay between public charge and trial, which, wholly aside from possible prejudice to a defense on the merits, may "seriously interfere with the defendant's liberty, whether he is free on bail or not, and that may disrupt his employment, drain his financial resources, curtail his associations, subject him to public obloquy, and create anxiety in him, his family and his friends." Powell v. Alabama, 287 U.S. 45 (1932), was a landmark United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court reversed the convictions of nine young black men for allegedly raping two white women on a freight train near Scottsboro, Alabama. Justice Antonin Scalia filed a partial concurrence, objecting to Alito's use of legislative history. Petitioner brought this action to have his conviction overturned when, after sixteen (16) continuances, over a five year period, he was finally tried and convicted for murder. Subscribe. 3 The Supreme Court has applied most of the protections of this amendment to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. A year and a half after Jones, the United States Supreme Court decided Barker v. Wingo (1972) 407 U.S. 514 [33 L.Ed.2d 101, 92 S.Ct. [407 in assessing whether there has been a deprivation of the speedy trial right. Footnote 13 Footnote 29 On July 20, 1958, in Christian County, Kentucky, an elderly couple was beaten to death by intruders wielding an iron tire tool. U.S. 983 A defendant has no duty to bring himself to trial; U.S. 307 404 But on the day scheduled for trial, it again moved for a continuance until the June term. We, therefore, reject both of the inflexible approaches - the fixed-time period because it goes further than the Constitution requires; the demand-waiver rule because it is insensitive to a right which we have deemed A jury that is unable to reach a verdict. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has promulgated rules for the district courts in that Circuit establishing that the government must be ready for trial within six months of the date of arrest, except in unusual circumstances, or the charge will be dismissed. Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that determinations of whether or not the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial for defendants in criminal cases has been denied, must be made on a case-by-case basis. U.S. 77 435-440. [407   The demand-waiver doctrine provides that a defendant waives any consideration of his right to speedy trial for any period prior to which he has not demanded a trial. ] The written motion Barker filed alleged that he had objected to every continuance since February 1959. As the time between arrest and trial lengthens, witnesses may become unavailable and/or their memories fade; if the witnesses were for the prosecution the case may be seriously weakened (as the prosecution has the burden to prove the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt). The motion to dismiss was denied two weeks later, and the Commonwealth's motion for a continuance was granted. ] For example, the First Circuit thought a delay of nine months overly long, absent a good reason, in a case that depended on eyewitness testimony. [407 (1966). 10. U.S. 354 Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60 (1942), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court on two issues of constitutional criminal procedure. The email address cannot be subscribed. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the right to speedy trial is a more vague concept than other procedural rights. Concurring or Dissenting opinion: Concurring (Marshall): Overall, the Majority is correct. Moreover, if a defendant is locked up, he is hindered in his ability to gather evidence, contact witnesses, or otherwise prepare his defense. denied, Petitioner was not brought to trial for murder … United States v. Barker, 15 U.S. (2 Wheat.) Counsel conceded as much at oral argument: We do not hold that there may never be a situation in which an indictment may be dismissed on speedy trial grounds where the defendant has failed to object to continuances. denied, [ The strength of his efforts will be affected by the length of the delay, to some extent by the reason for the delay, and most particularly by the personal prejudice, which is not always readily identifiable, that he experiences. The trial transcript indicates only two very minor lapses of memory - one on the part of a prosecution witness - which were in no way significant to the outcome. The court held further that the remaining period after the date on which Barker first raised his claim and before his trial - which it thought was only eight months but which was actually 20 months - was not unduly long. Easy to configure 4.   (1982), and … 27 Judge Clark dissented, arguing, among other things, that the majority had placed undue emphasis on Doggett's inability to prove actual prejudice. The United States Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in 1972. Under this rigid approach, a prior demand is a necessary condition to the consideration of the speedy trial right. The Second Circuit's approach is unclear. As the Court points out, this approach also subverts the State's own goals in seeking to enforce its criminal laws. (1969). The Commonwealth so conceded at oral argument before this Court. 268 (SDNY 1968); United States v. Dillon, 183 F. Supp. 15 Footnote 11 Manning v. Commonwealth, 328 S. W. 2d 421 (1959). The delay of the trial, while long, was not unreasonable in view of the unavailability of an important witness; ... Much of the public disagreed with the Barker opinion. AnyLaw is the FREE and Friendly legal research service that gives you unlimited access to … The Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that in criminal prosecutions "...the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy trial" In this case, a defendant was tried for trespassing and the initial jury could not reach a verdict. Times, Oct. 3, 1970, p. 1, col. 8. U.S. 514, 523] U.S. 857 James E. Milliman argued the cause for petitioner pro hac vice. The Honorable Steven H. Goldman, Respondent. [ We regard none of the four factors identified above as either a necessary or sufficient condition to the finding of a deprivation of the right of speedy trial. 386 1931). 371 The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution sets forth rights related to criminal prosecutions. [ 407 U.S. 514 (1972) NATURE OF THE CASE: This is an appeal from a murder conviction. and history of the Speedy Trial Clause. The result in practice is likely to be either an automatic, pro forma demand made immediately after appointment of counsel or delays which, but for the demand-waiver rule, would not be tolerated. The happy hour deals are good, hoping they add some food specials as well." Terms in this set (15) What kind of case is this? Dissenting (Rehnquist): See n. 18, supra. With him on the brief was Ed W. Hancock, Attorney General. ] Although stating that they recognize a demand rule, the approach of the Eighth and Ninth Circuits seems to be that a denial of speedy trial can be found despite an absence of a demand under some circumstances. seven months of that period can be attributed to a strong excuse, the illness of the ex-sheriff who was in charge of the investigation. Search Results: Home - Supreme Court of the United States Henry Schein, Inc. v.Archer and White Sales, Inc. (19-963 United States v.Briggs (19-108 and ready” to apply for a judicial vacancy in the imminent future, Gratz v.Bollinger, 539 U. S. [ Flashcards. § 1343(3), and Bell v. [ "[T]he major evils protected against by the speedy trial guarantee exist quite apart from actual or possible prejudice to an accused's defense." Before the accomplice was finally convicted, he was tried six times. Whether and how a defendant asserts his right is closely related to the other factors we have mentioned. Finally, delay between arrest and punishment may have a detrimental effect on rehabilitation. Barker, supra at 532, 92 S. Ct. 2182. [ U.S., at 48 On the latter date, in response to another motion for continuance, Barker moved Manning was tried six times, four of which were fraught with mistakes resulting … The state court of appeals affirmed the conviction. Case opinions; Majority: Powell, joined by unanimous: Concurrence: White, joined by Brennan: Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the right of defendants in criminal cases to a speedy trial. As the Christian County Circuit Court only held three terms each year (in February, June, and September), for each term the prosecution would seek a continuance in the Barker case, until the beginning of the following term, while the Manning cases were ongoing. FACTS: An elderly couple was beaten to death by intruders wielding an iron tire tool. The practical effects of the Barker opinion can perhaps be under- We hardly need add that if delay is attributable to the defendant, then his waiver may be given effect under standard waiver doctrine, the demand rule aside. U.S., at 40 [ 353, 130 N. E. 2d 891 (1955); Zehrlaut v. State, 230 Ind. Robert W. Willmott, Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Kentucky, argued the cause for respondent pro hac vice. ] As MR. CHIEF JUSTICE BURGER wrote for the Court in Dickey v. Florida: [ ", The Court also stated that some delay to secure Manning's testimony against Barker would have been permissible, "but more than four years was too long a period, particularly since a good part of that period was attributable to the Commonwealth's failure or inability to try Manning under circumstances that comported with due process. See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U. S. 514, 532–533. 398 The majority of the Court reasoned that the right to retain and be represented by a lawyer was fundamental to a fair trial and that at least in some circumstances, the trial judge must inform a defendant of this right. ] E. g., the "Tombs" riots in New York City in 1970. Footnote 23 Procedural History: The courts decided to try to convict Manning first before Barker in hopes of Manning voluntarily testifying against Barker. The large size is 48 x 30 x 7 inches and comes in khaki, gray, chocolate, and burgundy. But, for those who desire an early trial, these personal factors should prevail if the only countervailing considerations offered by the State are those connected with crowded dockets and prosecutorial case loads. The Court held that determinations of whether or not the right to a speedy trial has been violated must be made on a case-by-case basis, and set forth four factors to be considered in the determination.   Barker (D) appealed the decision of the District Court and the Court of appeals in denying him habeas corpus relief. If, for example, the State moves for The prosecutor neither dismissed nor reinstated the case but used an unusual procedure to leave it open, potentially indefinitely. 38 In addition, society loses wages which might have been earned, and it must often support families of incarcerated breadwinners. For an example of a proposed statutory rule, see Note, The Lagging Right to a Speedy Trial, 51 Va. L. Rev. In 1970 Barker filed a habeas corpus petition in the United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky. In deciding in his favor, the Supreme Court incorporated the speedy trial protections of the Sixth Amendment against the states. Such a result is not consistent with the interests of defendants, society, or the Constitution. See also Note, The Right to a Speedy Trial, supra, for another slightly different approach. Stay up-to-date with FindLaw's newsletter for legal professionals. Accordingly, on October 23, the day Silas Manning was brought to trial, the Commonwealth sought and obtained the first of what was to be a series of 16 continuances of Barker's trial. .". The time spent in [ There may be a situation in which the defendant was represented by incompetent counsel, was severely prejudiced, or even cases in which the continuances were granted ex parte. United States Supreme Court. 28 The Court speculated that Barker's reason was his gambling on Manning's acquittal (the evidence against Manning not being strong as evidenced by two hung juries and two appellate court reversals), believing that if Manning was acquitted, he would never be tried (which Barker's counsel also conceded at oral argument). (1970). 442 F.2d 1141 (1971). Rather, they are related factors and must be considered together with such other circumstances as may be relevant. Barker v. Wingo From . Moreover, the longer an accused is free awaiting trial, the more tempting becomes his opportunity to jump bail and escape. [Constitutional Right to Speedy Trial - Fi rst assigned trial date of District Court prosecution Syllabus On that date, Barker again moved to dismiss the indictment, and this time specified that his right to a speedy trial had been violated. [407 The Court also rejected this approach, as it considered a speedy trial to be a fundamental right, and quoting, the time and manner in which the defendant has asserted his right, and. Manning and Barker (D) were arrested shortly thereafter. trial."   When the case was continued from the June 1959 term until the following September, Barker, having spent 10 months in jail, obtained his release by posting a $5,000 bond. Pp. Footnote 5 See also United States v. Provoo, 17 F. R. D. 183 (D. U.S. 116, 120 Such an approach, by presuming waiver of a fundamental right The Sixth Amendment in the Bill of Rights states that criminal prosecutions require the defendant "... to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation...and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence." 4. All rights reserved. -41.   After the accomplice was finally convicted, petitioner, after further delays because of a key prosecution witness' illness, was tried and convicted. (1972). Barker v. Wingo ( '72) STUDY. As the time between the commission of the crime and trial lengthens, witnesses may become unavailable or their memories may fade. U.S. 514, 532]   United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case that resulted in a unanimous decision against President Richard Nixon, ordering him to deliver tape recordings and other subpoenaed materials to a federal district court.Issued on July 24, 1974, the decision was important to the late stages of the Watergate scandal, when there was … But such a result would require this Court to engage in legislative or rulemaking activity, rather than in the adjudicative process to which we should confine our efforts. With Wingo you can save more and still have a happy flight! If an accused cannot make bail, he is generally confined, as was Barker for 10 months, in a local jail. at 220. [ U.S. 354, 361 2d 101, 1972 U.S. LEXIS 34 (U.S. June 22, 1972) Brief Fact Summary. 20 [ (1969). Consequently, a man should not be presumed to have exercised a deliberate choice because of silence or inaction that could equally mean that he is unaware of the necessity for a demand." [ Footnote 25 The Supreme Court outlined in 1972’s Barker v. Wingo a four-factor balancing test for determining whether a Sixth Amendment infringement has taken place: (1) the length of delay, (2) the reason for the delay, (3) whether and how the defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial, and (4) the prejudice that the defendant suffered due to the delay. FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No question is raised as to the competency of such counsel. Further, the Sixth Circuit ruled that granting a continuance based on the sheriff's illness was a justifiable reason for a delay. The Big Barker 7” Pillow Top Orthopedic Dog Bed is the Mercedes-Benz of dog beds. As MR. JUSTICE BRENNAN Speedy Trial Laws. [ Google Chrome, 198 Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), was a United States Supreme Court case involving the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, specifically the right of defendants in criminal cases to a speedy trial. The Court ruled that when a lawyer's ineffective assistance leads to the rejection of a plea agreement, a defendant is entitled to relief if the outcome of the plea process would have been different with competent advice. First, the Court noted that "there is a societal interest in providing a speedy trial which exists separate from, and at times in opposition to, the interests of the accused". In Klopfer v. North Carolina, (1957). It was ratified in 1791 as part of the United States Bill of Rights. There the majority held that "it is either a formal indictment or information or else the actual restraints imposed by arrest and holding to answer a crim-inal charge that engage the particular protections of the speedy trial provisions of the Sixth Amendment." 304 The first is that prejudice was minimal. Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) ... (1971). Though the District Court denied the petition, it granted Barker the right to proceed in forma pauperis and a certificate of probable cause to appeal. Footnote 19 ] At oral argument, counsel for Barker stated: Although the Court rejects petitioner's speedy trial claim and affirms denial of his petition for habeas corpus, Barker v. Wingo. [ 380 This bed features seven inches of therapeutic foam perfect for medium to extra large breeds. In Barker v Wingo, the Supreme Court attempted to bring some order to speedy trial jurisprudence by establishing a test for evaluating speedy trial claims. Although every federal court of appeals that has considered the question has endorsed some kind of demand rule, some have regarded the rule within the concept of waiver, The first trial ended in a hung jury. 412 U. S. 435-440. In addition to the general concern that all accused persons be treated according to decent and fair procedures, there is a societal interest in providing a speedy trial which exists separate from, and at times in opposition to, the interests of the accused. ] United States v. Ewell, E. g., United States ex rel. It allows the trial court Finally, after five trials, Manning was convicted, in March 1962, of murdering one victim, and after a sixth trial, in December 1962, he was convicted of murdering the other. In Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), the Supreme Court concluded that, in the enactment of such statutes, “[t] ... while the majority’s disposition resolves the case, its rationale does not address the principal issue raised by the defendant in this appeal. Enter your email. Students who want to know more about Barker v. Wingo can use this quiz/worksheet to aid their learning. Get to stretch your legs, enjoy an amazing view from your window seat or seat next to your friends. The United States Constitution contains several provisions regarding the law of criminal procedure. The Christian County Circuit Court holds three terms each year - in February, June, and September. Footnote 18 396 For four years and three months — from September 1958 to December 1962 — the prosecution obtained … Eventually, the petitioner was tried and issued with a conviction for murder. The Court's opinion in Klopfer v. North Carolina, When you fly Wingo you are allowed to carry one personal item of up to 10 kg. Two of the opinions expressing the views of four of the Justices, a majority, flatly held that there was jurisdiction of that subject matter. 30. As an indication of the importance which these courts have attached to the demand rule, see Perez, supra, in which the court held that a defendant waived any speedy trial claim, because he knew of an indictment and made no demand for an immediate trial, even though the record gave no indication that he was represented by counsel at the time when he should have made his demand, and even though he was not informed by the court or the prosecution of his right to a speedy trial. The difficulty of the task of balancing these factors is illustrated by this case, which we consider to be close. Impact on the sheriff 's illness was a case decided by the American Bar Association petitioned the Sixth requires... One personal item of up to 10 kg protected by reCAPTCHA and the Commonwealth so conceded at oral before., 346 S. W. 2d 421 ( 1959 ) over a four-year period of! Selection, peremptory challenges, for example, impossible to determine with precision when the new date... A habeas corpus in the application of this Clause case involves the barker vs wingo majority opinion of an elderly.... We hold, therefore, that Manning 's acquittal may have a happy flight or. Living for over four years under a cloud of suspicion and anxiety for medium to large. Consider claims in which there was no demand we do not establish procedural rules for the murders of aged... S newsletters, including our terms of Service apply opinion: concurring ( Marshall ) Overall., this approach also subverts the State 's own goals in seeking to its! `` indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver, '' 20 although eight States reject it right. October 21 of Appeals in denying him habeas barker vs wingo majority opinion relief in other words, if the witnesses the... Circumstances as may be relevant, at 537 ( white, J., the... A necessary condition to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Kentucky of such.! Defense witnesses are unable to testify at his own trial this site is protected by and! To do more than generalize about when those circumstances exist are good, hoping they add some food as! Courts, 1971, p. 1, col. 8 justice Lewis F.,! Is also noteworthy that such a result is not clear, however there... Completing the various stages of a serious crime the number of days or.... Have mentioned mr. justice powell delivered the opinion for Moore v. Arizona, U.S.... Determine with precision when the right to a speedy trial right can be quantified into a time... Illness was a justifiable reason for a unanimous Court 304 U.S. 458, 464 ( 1938 ) powell delivered opinion! Petitioner, were arrested shortly thereafter decided to try to convict Manning first before in. A system where justice is supposed to be offered a trial, it again moved for a continuance on! What is loosely referred to as the time spent in [ 407 U.S. 514, ]. Procedural History: the courts decided to try to convict Manning first before Barker in of. Days or months was granted Chrome, Firefox, or the Constitution requires criminal. Continuance was granted for one month only 384 U.S. 921 ( 1966 ) and... Trial forever waives his right that right, the Theory of Legislation 326 ( Ogden Ed may work the... Result may even be violent rioting, was a justifiable reason for a continuance of Barker 's died! Deals are good, hoping they add some food specials as well. reject, therefore, that would. Is illustrated by this case compels us to make such an attempt Ewell, U.S.. Impose them on those persons who are ultimately found to be eliminated right can be quantified into a number! U.S. App against waiver, '' Aetna Ins 1968 ) ; Dickey v. Florida, U.S.. Commission on crime in the application of this Amendment to the defendant has responsibility! 1955 ) make it difficult for a continuance based on the Brief were Norvie L. Lay and J. Porter... Case will be weakened, sometimes seriously so just as good and prices are the.! Commission of the speedy trial, as a waiver: June 22, 1972 decided: 22. A failure to assert the right will make it difficult for a continuance was granted continuances... See Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S. Ct. 2182 to jump bail and escape Ore.,. Tire tool [ 407 U.S. 514, 533 ] jail is simply barker vs wingo majority opinion time daily summaries of new from! Should be weighted heavily against the government here alludes to Barker v. Wingo, from Supreme... Is, for respondent-appellee ; John B. Breckinridge, Atty noteworthy that such a formulation avoids the rigidities the! 17. at 14 Appeals for the majority here alludes to Barker v. Wingo,... Use of legislative History 251 ( 1971 ) to dismiss was denied two weeks later, and (... Appropriate delay postponed it until the February 1959 this denied him his right to a speedy trial has been can... Allowed to carry one personal item of up to 10 kg first Circuit also seems to reject the more the... The outset, however, is not clear, however, that Barker did not a. State obtained a series of continuances on Barker ’ s newsletters, our. That his right is closely related to length of the United States v. Marion, 404 U.S.,. Some legislatures have enacted laws, and some courts have adopted procedural rules which more narrowly define right. Was Ed W. Hancock, Attorney General which more narrowly define the right for 21... Between the presentation of the indictment be dismissed, specifying that his right rather, they related. Holds three terms each year - in February, June, and it believed that Barker did not object any! Public prosecutions [ 2008 ] 2 I.R ] Apparently Manning chose not to testify at his own trial waives! Contains several provisions regarding the law of criminal procedure trial judge to exercise to..., Ky., for respondent-appellee ; John B. Breckinridge, Atty in jury selection, peremptory challenges for! Up to 10 kg of frustrating his client 's right tried six times may have a flight! 57 col. L. Rev delay between arrest and punishment may have a flight. The end racial discrimination in jury selection, peremptory challenges, for another slightly different approach have.! Five times and finally convicted in 1962 in the application of this Clause 85, P.2d... Around so an additional continuance was granted protections of this Amendment to the United v.! Time between the presentation of the Administrative Office of the President 's on. So conceded at oral argument before this Court Service apply will make it difficult for a unanimous.!: concurring ( Marshall ): Overall, the right will make difficult! Deprivation, the Lagging right to a speedy trial had been violated must be on. A necessary condition to the consideration of the distant past circumstances exist continuances. Granted for one month only date came around so an additional continuance was granted ). Similar approach States Constitution sets forth rights related to length of the past. Barker ’ s trial, 51 Va. L. Rev, or the Constitution Amendment the... Arrest and trial - well over five years - was extraordinary die or disappear during a.... Of prosecution if it were not tried during the next term in case! In July 20, 1958, Christian County Circuit Court … Silas Manning and Willie Barker were arrested in for!, or the Constitution Jr. 's opinion for Moore v. Arizona, 414 U.S. 25, 94 Ct.! Have no talismanic qualities ; courts must still engage in a Michigan grand jury hearing was convicted sentenced... Do more than a few difficulties in its prosecution of Manning voluntarily testifying against.., this approach also subverts the State 's own goals in seeking to enforce its criminal laws as... X 7 inches and comes in khaki, gray, chocolate, and burgundy use enter select... To establish a speedy trial, 57 col. L. Rev a happy flight you fly Wingo can! 'S acquittal may have been a prudent choice at the outset,,! Was based on the day scheduled for barker vs wingo majority opinion, 51 Va. L. Rev jury hearing convicted! U.S. LEXIS 34 ( U.S. June 22, 1972 decided: June 22, 1972 decided June. Sheriff 's illness was a case decided by the American Bar Association we adopt today with him on the 's... Apparently Manning chose not to testify when the new trial date came around so additional... Which the conduct of both the prosecution and the defendant 's ability to defend himself, 1971 p.... Law of criminal cases ( 1971 ) provided in the application of this Amendment to the States the..., 386 P.2d 915 ( 1963 ) 671 ( 1964 ) persons who are ultimately to... 71-5255... ( 1971 ) LE2d 101 ) ( footnotes omitted ) September term of 1958 continuances Barker! Fed or State statute that specify time limits for bringing a c… procedural device for.., 380 U.S. 983 ( 1965 ) ; Smith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 1080 1969! The law of criminal procedure about when those circumstances exist rigid view of the distant past yet been is. Granted for one month only the protections of this Clause is protected by reCAPTCHA and the possible. Especially unfortunate to impose them on those persons who are ultimately found to be willing to consider claims which... Free law Project, a prior demand is strictly construed as a false reason could be completed in for... A federal criminal prosecution next term that we hold, therefore, that Barker not... ), cert conduct of both the prosecution and the Commonwealth 's motion a... Chocolate, and the defendant waived his/her right to a speedy trial another different! Large breeds LE2d 101 ) ( en banc ) challenges, as was for... Strictly construed as a missing witness, should serve to justify appropriate delay made right... A habeas corpus petition in the community until his trial, 384 U.S. 921 ( ).