BEGHTEL

v.

CALIFORNIA

Citator

Cited By

• Smith v. United States, 331 F.2d 784 (D.C. Cir. 1964)
  …re a 4-year delay has occurred,. United States v. Lustman, 258 F. 2d 475, 478 (2 Cir.), cert. denied, 358 U.S. 880, 79 S.Ct. 118, 3 L.Ed.2d 109 (1958). . Id.; and see 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). . Compare United States v. Graham, 289 F. 2d 352 (7 Cir. 1961), where the accused had kept the court occupied with various proceedings. . For tliat reason we do not now condemn the District Court’s calendar sy…
• Hinton v. United States, 424 F.2d 876 (D.C. Cir. 1969)
  …epeth I), supra note 15, 124 U.S.App.D.C. at 295, 364 F. 2d at 688. . Compare Mathies v. United States, 126 U.S.App.D.C. 98, 100 n. 1, 374 F. 2d 312, 314 n. 1 (1967); 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). But see Harling v. United States, 130 U.S.App.D.C. 327, 401 F. 2d 392 (1968), cert. denied, 393 U.S. 1068, 89 S.Ct. 725, 21 L.Ed.2d 711 (1969). . Smith v. United States, 118 U.S.App.D.C. 38, 41, 331 F. 2d 784, 7…