Legal Opinion
United States v. A. Guy Crouch, III and Michael J. Frye
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Decided May 30, 1996No. 93-7719PublishedCited by 137 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GARWOOD, Circuit Judge:
In this prosecution for alleged savings and loan offenses, the district court, prior to trial, dismissed the indictment against Guy Crouch III (Crouch) and Michael Frye (Frye) for pre-indictment delay, notwithstanding that the statute of limitations had not run. United States v. Crouch, 835 F.Supp. 938 (S.D.Tex.1993). The government appeals.
The district court, following a hearing before a magistrate judge, concluded that the delay was sufficiently extensive “to constitute substantial presumptive prejudice” and was also shown to “have resulted in some actual prejudice.”…
2Cases cited72 opinions
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Daniels v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. MarionSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Rochin v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
- Olim v. WakinekonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
67 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by137 opinions
- Ibarra v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
- State of Texas v. Wilson, Carolyn Sue KrizanCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2011
- Anson McFaul v. Daniel ValenzuelaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2012
- Gonzales v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2014
- State v. GilleyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2008
132 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.