From United States v. Crawford, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 97538 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 17, 2010):
"A delay approaching one year is presumptively prejudicial." United States v. Robinson, 455 F.3d 602, 607 (6th Cir. 2006) (citing Doggett 505 U.S. at 652 n. 1). Further, the Sixth Circuit has noted, "there seems general agreement that any delay of eight months or longer is 'presumptively prejudicial.' " United State v. Jackson, 473 F.3d 660, 665 (6th Cir. 2007) (quoting Gregory P.N. Joseph, Speedy Trial Rights in Application, 48 Fordham L. Rev. 611, 623 n. 71 (1980), cited in Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647, 652 n. 1 (1992)). In United States v. Brown, 498 F.3d 523, 530 (6th Cir. 2007), the Sixth Circuit assumed that a ten-month delay was sufficient to trigger further judicial examination. In United States v. Gardner, 488 F.3d 700, 719 (6th Cir. 2007), however, the court found that a nine-month delay was not presumptively prejudicial where there were multiple defendants and pretrial motions. Because this case involves an "ordinary street crime," with only one defendant, the Court will continue to analyze the remaining Barker factors. The Court notes that because the delay has only been nine months, the first factor does not significantly weigh in favor of Defendant's motion.
Share this article: