Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Speedy Trial Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides, "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial...". [1] The Clause protects the defendant from delay between the presentation of the indictment or similar charging instrument and the beginning of trial.
In the United States, basic speedy trial rights are protected by the Speedy Trial Clause of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. For federal charges, the Speedy Trial Act of 1974 applies. The trial must commence within 70 days from the date the information or indictment was filed, or from the date the defendant appears before ...
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for ...
A defendant may not expressly waive his rights under the Speedy Trial Act. [12] However, if the trial judge determines that the "ends of justice" served by a continuance outweigh the interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, the delay occasioned by such continuance is excluded from the Act's time limits. [13]
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy . . . trial . . . . [3] The Speedy Trial Clause regulates delay between the bringing of a formal criminal charge and/or the pre-trial deprivation of the accused's liberty and the start of trial. [31] The Clause has been incorporated to apply in state prosecutions. [32]
3.1 Speedy Trial Clause. 3.2 Public Trial Clause. 3.3 Jury Clauses. 3.3.1 Availability of the jury. ... 3.7.5 Conflict-free counsel. 3.7.6 Ineffective assistance of ...
This principle is the basis for the right to a speedy trial and similar rights which are meant to expedite the legal system, because of the unfairness for the injured party who sustained the injury having little hope for timely and effective remedy and resolution.
Klopfer's attorney argued that this was a violation of the right to a speedy trial since it left the charges hanging over Klopfer's head indefinitely, interfering with his right to travel and his professional activity. Klopfer made this speedy trial argument in appealing to the North Carolina Supreme Court. That Court considered the right to a ...