District of Columbia v. Benefield
District of Columbia Court of Appeals
1Per curiam
Two cases (traffic and disorderly conduct) had been continued for trial previously, once at the request of appellee and once by mutual consent of the government and appellee. On the third trial date, the government, over the objection of defense counsel, requested a short continuance to secure an essential witness who had been brought to its attention the previous evening. The trial court denied the request and insisted that the government proceed with the trial. The prosecutor was not allowed to nol-pros the cases and, when the government refused to proceed, the trial court swore-in appellee…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Miller A. Dixon v. District of ColumbiaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
- United States v. FosterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967
- District of Columbia v. WeamsDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1965
- District of Columbia v. DixonDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1967
- Smith v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1966
3Cited by6 opinions
- United States v. MacKDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1972
- Rufener v. ShaudIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
- Rufener v. ShaudIdaho Supreme Court · 1977
- State v. DiazIdaho Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. SonnelandWashington Supreme Court · 1972
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.