Whether the 6th Amendment permits the introduction of a criminal defendant's pre-indictment delay caused by the government as substantive evidence of defendant's guilt

No question identified. : TL Wheihea this Count Should sesolve the longstanding — Conflict among Fedeaal Courts over tihetrer the PPI amen-olment peami+s. the Intacduction of a e@Aiminal defensant's Phe-indietment delay Caused by Me government aS Substantive evidence of cleSendaut's guilk AWhe tree He Disheick Corsh’s eaacr in denyng petitioner thet he Received inefRective assistance. of Counsel olweing tre preteial Mbage:s of nis Case tihhich Ib a vidlation of his Sita amendment tothe timited Stebes Constitution, Gulnich his Atgits cos oa Steuctiaal CRACK trak haamed the petitimer. 3 Whe tree re Seventy Cimcath Cone eased in Failing he addaess Bre _impack Ine Disheick Cormb's eaacn may have hack on the pebthiones's olefense. of entrapment obich uiaS o violation > the fourteents amendaent te tue united Yates ConStitubion Lohich pervasive and voluminauS evidence af outtogeous Conduct of Ded Offrcial's csor ignored Oud eanonesushy admitted ts Convich the petitioned. 9. 4“ Ubelker Disharct Sudge abuse hea discmection wshece She hnosaring ly Stated frat She dot tniak pebtioes aleseave anyhime fore fais case bat. She. hos to. sive Wim Some time This Judge benowig that tie Facts of dats aqpeement She distregtaded he facts of ihy 2. Shouts mot be indécteol OR Face Cain inal prosecution. Distiet Judge figneted the Aescosete of the Anited States AHeoeneg at. the. Sentencing Stage. athich hed Comment Was