United States v. James W. McGrath Jon N. English and Raymond D. Masciarelli

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that defendant’s “contentions exclusively involve the period before July 1, 1976, and thus are not at all covered by the Speedy Trial Act”
• noting that defendant’s “contentions exclusively involve the period before July 1, 1976, and thus are not at all covered by the Speedy Trial Act”
• explanation that tapes had to be moved from Binghamton to Albany to Auburn, New York, deemed satisfactory excuse for \relatively short\ delays of three-to-eight days that included a weekend
• explanation that tapes had to be moved from Binghamton to Albany to Auburn, New York, deemed satisfactory excuse for “relatively short” delays of three-to-eight days that included a weekend
• “section 2518 was not intended to bar use of wiretaps only when the defendant can show prejudice or present evidence of tampering or other governmental bad faith”
• no speedy trial violation because, inter alia, “[t]here is no evidence of bad faith or deliberate delays here”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).