COVINGTON

v.

UNITED STATES

Citator

Cited By

• Sterling H. Nickens v. United States, 323 F.2d 808 (D.C. Cir. 1963)
  …of the combination of factors which, in sum, effected a denial of the right of speedy trial. The importance of this factor to our decision in Taylor was emphasized in James v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 263, 201 F. 2d 381 (1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 930, 79 S.Ct. 613, 3 L.Ed.2d 631 (1959). . Compare Rule 48(b), E.R.Crim.P. . Ibid. . Some courts have held a complaint and indictment may be delayed with impunity, [*813] without regard to the right to speedy trial, because the time of indictment is g…
• Turberville v. United States, 303 F.2d 411 (D.C. Cir. 1962)
  …rberville moved for an examination, and the motion was granted February 12th. . Brooks v. United States, 110 U.S.App.D.C. 192, 290 F. 2d 383 (D.C.Cir. 1961); James v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 263, 261 F. 2d 381 (D.C.Cir. 1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 930, 79 S.Ct. 613, 3 L.Ed.2d 631 (1959); Pietch v. United States, 110 F. 2d 817, 129 A.L.R. 563 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, 310 U.S. 648, 60 S.Ct. 1100, 84 L.Ed. 1414 (1940); Chinn v. United States, 228 F. 2d 151 (4th Cir. 1955). See Beavers v. Haubert,…
• Reichert v. United States, 359 F.2d 278 (D.C. Cir. 1966)
  …t upon evidence which had not been admitted,11 particularly respecting the “statements” which had been produced under the circumstances we described. Reversed. . Cf. James v. United States, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 263, 261 F. 2d 381 (1958), cert. denied, 359 U.S. 930, 79 S.Ct. 613, 3 L.Ed. 2d 631 (1959); Smith v. United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 38, 331 F. 2d 784 (en banc 1964). . To borrow from the text of defense counsel’s question. . United States v. Forzano, 190 F. 2d 687, 689 (2 Cir. 1951); cf. Smith v. Un…