Legal Opinion
United States v. James Tunnessen, Douglas Fullerton, and Michael Robert Reape, Defendants
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 24, 1985No. 1095, 1096, 1112, Dockets 84-1419, 1431, 1458PublishedCited by 77 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FEINBERG, Chief Judge:
Section 3161(h)(8)(A) of the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161 et seq. (the Act), permits a district court to toll the running of the speedy trial “clock” upon a determination that the “ends of justice” so require. Since such continuances, if too freely granted, would undermine the purposes of the Act, care must be taken to confine them to appropriate circumstances. In these appeals, we must decide whether the district court followed the proper procedures for granting an ends-of-justice continuance.
James Tunnessen and Michael Robert Reape appeal from judgments of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- United States v. Mitchell JanikCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1983
- United States v. RushCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1984
- United States v. Mark A. MitchellCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983
- United States v. John Malcolm Cobb, IVCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
- United States v. Russell BufalinoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by77 opinions
- United States v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- United States v. Thomas GambinoCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- United States v. Mario Biaggi, Stanley Simon, Richard Biaggi, Peter Neglia, John Mariotta, and Bernard EhrlichCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- United States v. Alan N. ScottCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2001
- United States v. Robert KiszewskiCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
72 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.