Legal Opinion · Dissent

United States v. Robert E. Bratcher

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit

Decided January 19, 1988No. 86-6189Published

1DissentDowd, District Judge

I respectfully dissent. It is well established that an interlocutory appeal cannot be taken from the denial of a motion to dismiss on the basis of a violation of the Speedy Trial Act. United States v. Bilsky, 664 F.2d 613 (6th Cir.1981); United States v. Hornung, 785 F.2d 868 (10th Cir.1987). However, I dissent in the belief that a different conclusion should be reached where the district court finds that the defendant’s right to a statutory speedy trial has been violated, but contemporaneously holds, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3162(a)(2), that the dismissal of the indictment is without…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Coopers & Lybrand v. LivesaySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Abney v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Stack v. BoyleSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  4. Flanagan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  5. Helstoski v. MeanorSupreme Court of the United States · 1979

4 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