Legal Opinion
Marshall v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 21, 1986No. D003951PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
WORK, J.
I
William Sam Marshall seeks a writ of prohibition to prevent further prosecution of murder charges against him on the ground his right to speedy trial under the Agreement on Detainers (hereinafter referred to as IAD), Penal Code section 1389, has been denied. He relies on article III, subdi*664visions (a) and (d) of that act. Subdivision (a) gives a “person [who] has entered upon a term of imprisonment in a penal or correctional institution of a party state” the right to demand a trial within 180 days of his properly delivered written request for final disposition of matters as to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States of America Ex Rel. Frank Esola, 53517 v. Ronald M. Groomes, SuperintendentCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1975
- United States v. Leroy SorrellCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Claude John Scallion, Raymond Lynn Buckelew, James Laney Jenkins and Judsonlee DraneCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1976
- United States v. SorrellDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1976
- People v. ChristensenIllinois Supreme Court · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- In Re Dacus, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2011
- People v. GarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
- People v. BrooksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1987
- People v. DialCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2004
- People v. LavinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.