United States v. Meyer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 federal appellate · 3 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Meyer’s sixth amendment claim is based on the three-year delay between the date of the offense and the date of the trial. Her claim is without merit because it ignores the intervening dismissal of the first indictment. The original indictment was dismissed without prejudice only two months after it was returned. She was not reindicted until nearly three years later. This three-year period between the dismissal of that indictment and Meyer’s reindictment for the same offense does not implicate her sixth amendment right to a speedy trial because that guaranty is not operative after charges have been formally dismissed. See United States v. MacDonald, 456 U.S. 1, 9-10 , 102 S. Ct. 1497, 1502-03 , 71 L. Ed. 2d 696 (1982)____Such a delay implicates only the due process clause.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Trammell

2. “[b]efore an inquiry is made into any actual prejudice suffered, the defendant must establish that the 'government intentionally delayed either to gain a tactical advantage or to harass [him].'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Benshop

3. “we would normally first inquire into whether [the defendant] was actually prejudiced by the delay.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. United States v. Benshop