Supreme Court of North Carolina· 5/6/2022
State v. Farook
Syllabus
On a motion to dismiss for a Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation, the State may not elicit privileged testimony from a criminal defendant's former attorney to justify the delay in the case. A criminal defendant can prove prejudice for purposes of his Sixth Amendment speedy trial claim under Barker v. Wingo by demonstrating actual or presumptive prejudice.
Cites
16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court· 1972-06-22· cited 12,108×
- Simmons v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1968-03-18· cited 6,700×
- United States v. MarionSupreme Court· 1971-12-20· cited 3,756×
- Upjohn Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1981-01-13· cited 3,227×
- Doggett v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1992-06-24· cited 3,106×
- United States v. AtkinsonSupreme Court· 1936-02-03· cited 1,580×
- United States v. Loud HawkSupreme Court· 1986-03-03· cited 786×
- Pollard v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1957-02-25· cited 744×
- Moore v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1973-11-05· cited 594×
- Vermont v. BrillonSupreme Court· 2009-03-09· cited 559×
- Matias v. HerbertSupreme Court· 2001-10-01· cited 80×
- State v. MeltonSupreme Court of North Carolina· 2018-12-07· cited 44×
- State v. McNeillSupreme Court of North Carolina· 2018-06-08· cited 37×
- State v. Smith.Supreme Court of North Carolina· 1905-05-23· cited 18×
- State v. WilkersonCourt of Appeals of North Carolina· 2018-02-06· cited 16×
- State v. DiazSupreme Court of North Carolina· 2019-08-16· cited 11×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.