How a Massive Government Negligence Got This Case Dismissed. 8 Years on the Run?

Collect Call with Lawstache

Content provided by Anton Vialtsin, Esq. and Anton Vialtsin. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Anton Vialtsin, Esq. and Anton Vialtsin or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.

3M ago 11:49

MP3•Episode home

Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (1992), is a Supreme Court case addressing the right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment.

Facts:

Marc Doggett was indicted in 1980 for drug-related charges. Shortly after the indictment, he left the United States. While authorities knew he was in Colombia and later Panama, they failed to apprehend him due to logistical issues. In 1982, Doggett returned to the U.S. unnoticed and lived openly for the next six years. He was arrested in 1988, but during this time, he had no knowledge of the indictment.

Issue:

Does an 8½-year delay between the indictment and arrest, largely due to government negligence, violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial?

Holding:

Yes, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Doggett, holding that the delay violated his right to a speedy trial.

Reasoning:

The Court applied the Barker v. Wingo (1972) balancing test, which considers:

Length of delay: The 8½-year delay was presumptively prejudicial.
Reason for delay: The government was negligent in pursuing Doggett, as they could have located him with reasonable effort.
Defendant’s assertion of the right: Doggett could not assert his right earlier because he was unaware of the indictment.
Prejudice to the defendant: The Court presumed prejudice due to the excessive delay caused by government negligence, even without specific proof of harm to Doggett's defense.

Outcome:

The Court reversed Doggett’s conviction, emphasizing that a lengthy, negligent delay by the government undermines the defendant’s Sixth Amendment right, even if the defendant cannot show concrete prejudice.

This case underscores the importance of timely prosecution and holds the government accountable for unnecessary delays in pursuing charges.

Anton Vialtsin, Esq.
LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM | Criminal Defense and Business Law
https://lawstache.com
(619) 357-6677
Do you want to buy our Lawstache merchandise? Maybe a t-shirt?
https://lawstache.com/merch/
Want to mail me something (usually mustache related)? Send it to 185 West F Street, Suite 100-D, San Diego, CA 92101
Want to learn about our recent victories?
https://lawstache.com/results-notable-cases/
If you'd like to support this channel, please consider purchasing some of the following products. We get a little kickback, and it does NOT cost you anything extra:
*Calvin Klein Men's Dress Shirt Slim Fit Non-iron, https://amzn.to/3zm6mkf
*Calvin Klein Men's Slim Fit Dress Pant, https://amzn.to/3G8jLQG
*Johnson and Murphy Shoes, https://amzn.to/3KmfX0Y
*Harley-Davidson Men's Eagle Piston Long Sleeve Crew Shirt, https://amzn.to/43gFtMC
*Amazon Basics Tank Style Highlighters, https://amzn.to/3zwOEKZ
*Pilot Varsity Disposable Fountain Pens, https://amzn.to/40EjSfm
*Apple 2023 Mac Mini Desktop Computer, https://amzn.to/3Km2aGC
*ClearSpace Plastic Storage Bins, https://amzn.to/3Kzle5q
Are you are a Russian speaker? Вы говорите по-русски?
https://russiansandiegoattorney.com
Based in San Diego, CA
Licensed: California, Nevada, and Federal Courts
The San Diego-based business litigation and criminal defense attorneys at LAWSTACHE™ LAW FIRM are e...

148 episodes

#True Crime #Anton Vialtsin, Esq #Anton Vialtsin #Criminal #4th Amendment #Supreme Court #Law #2nd Amendment #9th Circuit #Murder #Society #News Talk #News #Legal Cases #Sentences