Legal Opinion
United States v. Danylo
Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces
Decided March 24, 2014No. 13-0570/AFPublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Judge STUCKY
delivered the opinion of the Court.
Appellant was in pretrial confinement for nearly a year before he was convicted of various drug crimes and assault. We granted review to determine whether he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial when his court-martial commenced about 350 days after he entered pretrial confinement, and whether the military judge erred when he focused only on a portion of the delay in his speedy trial analysis after the appellate court had already ruled on the other portion. We hold that the delay does not rise to the level of a Sixth Amendment…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Bell v. WolfishSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Doggett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- United States v. EwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. MacDonaldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. CooleyCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2016
- United States v. WilderCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2016
- U.S. V.WILEYNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2017
- United States v. ChatmanNavy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals · 2014
- United States v. DanyloCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 2014
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.