Tennessee Supreme Court· 8/18/2005
State v. Hawk
Citations
- 170 S.W.3d 547
- 2005 Tenn. LEXIS 656
- 2005 WL 1981847
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- employing de novo standard for review of a speedy trial claim
- “We also hold that the defendant is not entitled to seek interlocutory review of the trial court’s order rejecting her alleged Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation.”
- “We also hold that the defendant is not entitled to seek interlocutory review of the trial court’s order rejecting her alleged Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation.”
- “We also hold that the defendant is not entitled to seek interlocutory review of the trial court’s order rejecting her alleged Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation”
- “We also hold that the defendant is not entitled to seek interlocutory review of the trial court’s order rejecting her alleged Sixth Amendment speedy trial violation.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: III, Anderson, Birch, Holder, Barker
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.