No. 23-5342
Roger Rachon Cooley v. United States
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: barker-test barker-v-wingo constitutional-rights four-factor-balancing-test judicial-review motion-to-dismiss negligence prejudice sixth-amendment speedy-trial
Key Terms:
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction
Latest Conference:
2023-09-26
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Did the lower courts err in analyzing the four factor balancing test outlined in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, (1972) when they denied Mr. Cooley's motion to dismiss, thus violating his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTION PRESENTED Did the lower courts err in analyzing the four factor balancing test outlined in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, (1972) when they denied Mr. Cooley’s motion to dismiss, thus violating his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial? i
Docket Entries
2023-10-02
Petition DENIED.
2023-08-24
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/26/2023.
2023-08-17
Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
2023-08-08
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 11, 2023)
Attorneys
Roger Cooley
Adam Justinger — SW&L Attorneys, Petitioner
United States
Elizabeth B. Prelogar — Solicitor General, Respondent