No. 23-5116

Jeremy David Adams v. United States

Lower Court: Sixth Circuit
Docketed: 2023-07-17
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: bond-motion continuance continuance-exclusion party-presentation-principle plain-error-review pretrial-detention pretrial-release sixth-circuit-rule speedy-trial-act statutory-interpretation
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Question not identified

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions For Review Speedy Trial Act Operation (1). Is the Sixth Circuit's new rule, in opposition to 7 other Courts of Appeals -that the protections of Speedy Trial Act 18 USC § 3161(h)(1)(H)'s 30 day ‘under advisement' period can be bypassed when no hearing was ever held for an infinitely pending bond motion -thereby denying pretrial release under § 3164(c), correct? (II). Where a pro forma continuance under 18 USC § 3161(h)(7)(A) for 'pretrial motion preparation’ was raised sua sponte at arraignment, can that time be excluded when there are no contemporaneous case-specific facts to support that the preparation would be anything other than routine? (III). Does the “reasonably necessary" delay exclusion of § 3161(h)(7) continuances have a different meaning and application under § 3164 because of the different context in which it arises, because the harm caused by postponing a trial is not comparable to the harm caused by continued oppressive pretrial detention? Party Presentation Principle (IV). If the government forfeited a Speedy Trial Act exclusion argument (that an infinitely pending bond motion excludes all time), is that argument on appeal: (1) waived because it was an affirmative defense?; (2) waived because the district court did not provide fair notice when it raised the argument swa sponte?; (3) forfeited but can prevail on plain error review?; or (4) not waived or forfeited and as if the government had raised it itself? (V). Is the government excepted from the party presentation principle? Can a Court of Appeals affirm on any argument supported by the record, even if the government didn't raise the argument in either instance -that withdrawing a pending bond motion deprived the district court from holding a hearing? 2

Docket Entries

2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-07-27
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-07-19
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-07-12
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due August 16, 2023)
2023-07-12
Motion to expedite consideration of the petition for a writ of certiorari filed by petitioner.

Attorneys

Jeremy David Adams
Jeremy David Adams — Petitioner
Jeremy David Adams — Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent
Elizabeth B. PrelogarSolicitor General, Respondent