United States of America, and v. Ronald Holm, And
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
1Per curiam
In May of 1975 the grand jury for the Southern District of California charged the defendant Holm and others with conspiracy to possess amphetamines with intent to distribute them, a violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The indictment was superseded in November, 1975, by a new indictment which named two additional defendants and added two additional counts not pertaining to Holm.
Holm filed a motion alleging that the delay in bringing the indictment violated his fifth amendment right to a fair trial, and the District Court denied the motion. However, the motion was granted as to a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Thompson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1913
- United States v. Cecil R. Mays, Robert Jack Coltrane, Buddy Herman Mathis, Defendants- United States of America v. Robert Jack Coltrane, Cecil R. Mays, J. Robert WestCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1977
3Cited by14 opinions
- United States v. BakerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1993
- United States v. Jack Moody Stricklin, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
- United States v. VavlitisCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1993
- United States v. HickeyCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
- United States v. Phillip Randy CastiglioneCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.