Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Jimmie White

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided April 10, 2019No. 16-1009Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partClay, Circuit Judge

This case comes before us pursuant to a grant, vacate, and remand order ("GVR") from the Supreme Court. All that remains at issue is whether the district court properly excluded a period of two weeks when determining whether Defendant was indicted more than thirty days after his arrest, in violation of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(b). During that two-week period, Defendant was engaged in plea negotiations with the government. The majority holds (1) that time spent in plea negotiations is not automatically excludable under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(1), and (2) that Defendant nevertheless…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. United States v. OlanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CampbellSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  3. Pittman v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2018
  4. Zedner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2006
  5. Bloate v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2010

27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API