Skip to main content
· 3/21/1995

United States v. Karen Talbot Hazel Grossman

Citations

  • 51 F.3d 183
  • 95 Daily Journal DAR 3507
  • 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2071
  • 1995 U.S. App. LEXIS 5545
  • 1995 WL 124612

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that Federal Criminal Rule 7(e
  • providing that “[t]here are four relevant grounds that provide a district court with the authority to dismiss an information: (1) the Speedy Trial Act; (2) due process; (3) Rule 7(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and (4) Rule 48(b
  • setting out a two-part test to determine whether a delay in charging violated due process: “(1) the defendant must prove actual, non-speculative prejudice from the delay; and (2
  • “Superseding accusatory instruments can contain additional counts not charged in prior instruments.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Goodwin, O'Scannlain, Kleinfeld

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.