skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 147982 Find in a Library
Title: SIXTH AMENDMENT - EXTENDING SIXTH AMENDMENT SPEEDY TRIAL PROTECTION TO DEFENDANTS UNAWARE OF THEIR INDICTMENTS
Journal: Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology  Volume:83  Issue:4  Dated:(Winter 1993)  Pages:804-835
Author(s): S M Wernikoff
Date Published: 1993
Page Count: 32
Type: Issue Overview
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This Note examines Sixth Amendment Speedy Trial protection.
Abstract: In Doggett v. United States, the United States Supreme Court extended Sixth Amendment speedy trial protection to a defendant unaware of his indictment. This Note argues that the Court reasonably extended the right of the accused under the Sixth Amendment to an individual unaware of an indictment against him. The Note argues that the Court majority correctly extended the Sixth Amendment to protect against defense impairment caused by long delays. Therefore, defendants unaware of the charges against them can still base a speedy trial claim on the impairment of their defense, regardless of whether liberty infringement has occurred. This Note further argues that the Court majority properly found that, in cases where lengthy delays occur, the defendant should not have to prove actual prejudice. The Court failed, however, to distinguish between extraordinary delays, which foster presumed prejudice, and shorter delays which do not. Finally, this Note argues that the Court wisely held the Government to a higher prosecutorial due diligence standard. Footnotes
Main Term(s): Criminal law
Index Term(s): Courts; Defendants; Indictment; Right to speedy trial
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=147982

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.