United States v. Joseph Brenna

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the district court must, at a minimum, state that it is entering an ‘ends of justice’ continuance or a continuance pursuant to section 3161(h)(8)(A)” in order to exclude time from the speedy trial clock
• declining to exclude 7 days where a “district judge did not order an ends of justice continuance before the seventy-day period expired”
• acknowledging danger of retroactive rationalization where judge waits until asked to dismiss
• acknowledging danger of retroactive rationalization where judge waits until asked to dismiss
• \We reaffirm ... that an ends of justice continuance ... cannot be entered nunc pro tunc ....\
• “The order continuing the case must be entered before the days to be excluded.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).