U.S. Supreme Court 05-26-11
by: Grapkoch • May 25, 2011 • no comments
Read the full article for details about the following new cases:
- Requisite Proof for Witness Tampering 18 USC § 1512(a)(1)(C)
* Automatic Exclusions under the Speedy Trial Act
In addition to its decision in Camreta v. Greene, the Court issued two other criminal opinions today. However, both involve the construction of federal statutes.
Requisite Proof for Witness Tampering 18 USC § 1512(a)(1)(C)
In Fowler v. United States, the Court addressed whether a defendant can be convicted of murder under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(a)(1)(C), which is part of the federal witness-tampering statute, without proof that information regarding a possible federal crime would have been transferred from the victim to federal law enforcement officers or judges.
The circumstances of this case narrowed the issue to cases "where a defendant killed a person with an intent to prevent that person from communicating with law enforcement officers in general but where the defendant did not have federal law enforcement officers (or any specific individuals) particularly in mind." The Court answers that "in such circumstances, the Government must show that there was a reasonable likelihood that a relevant communication would have been made to a federal officer" in addition to the defendant's general intent.
More information can be found at the SCOTUSblog case page available here.
Automatic Exclusions under the Speedy Trial Act
In United States v. Tinklenberg, the Court addressed whether the time between the filing of a pretrial motion and its disposition is automatically excluded from the deadline for commencing trial under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974, or is instead excluded only if the motion actually causes a postponement, or the expectation of a postponement, of the trial.
The Court answers that "the filing of a pretrial motion falls within [18 USC §3161(h)(1)(D)] irrespective of whether it actually causes, or is expected to cause, delay." Therefore, the time between filing and disposition is automatically excluded.
On an additional point, the Court also notes that days and weekends are included in the ten-day counting period features in § 3161(h)(1)(F), which provides that in certain circumstances the time required to transport prisoners is automatically excluded up to a ten-day maximum. The Court's decision is premised upon its rejection of the idea that the STA incorporated former Fed.R.Crim.P 45.
More information can be found at the SCOTUSblog case page available here.
