United States v. Dragone

Second Circuit

United States v. Dragone

78 F.3d 65, 1996 WL 115384

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit

DecidedMarch 8, 1996

DocketNo. 1144, Docket 95-1475

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 78 F.3d 65 (United States v. Dragone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United States v. Dragone, 78 F.3d 65, 1996 WL 115384 (2d Cir. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the district court’s exercise of its discretion under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3162(a)(2), to dismiss “with prejudice” for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court’s Memorandum and Order dated July 7, 1995. See United States v. Upton, 921 F.Supp. 100 (E.D.N.Y.1995). Because of our disposition of this matter, we need not address the government’s challenge to the district court’s conclusion that the pretrial delay in this case violated the Constitution’s Speedy Trial Clause.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

We affirm the district court’s exercise of its discretion under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3162(a)(2), to dismiss “with prejudice” for substantially the reasons set forth in the district court’s Memorandum and Order dated July 7, 1995. See United States v. Upton, 921 F.Supp. 100 (E.D.N.Y.1995). Because of our disposition of this matter, we need not address the government’s challenge to the district court’s conclusion that the pretrial delay in this case violated the Constitution’s Speedy Trial Clause.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

78 F.3d 65, 1996 WL 115384, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-dragone-ca2-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack