United States, Petitioner v. Jason Louis Tinklenberg (563 U.S. 647)

U.S. Supreme Court · decided May 26, 2011 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)

Citation
563 U.S. 647 · 131 S. Ct. 2007
Decided
May 26, 2011
Term
October Term 2010
Vote
8–0
Majority author
Justice Breyer
Issue area
Criminal Procedure
Disposition
Affirmed
Outcome
Petitioning party lost
Ideological direction
Liberal

Opinion excerpt

Justice Breyer delivered the opinion of the Court. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974, 18 U. S.C. §3161 et seq;> provides that in “any case in which a plea of not guilty is entered, the trial.. . shall commence within seventy days” from the later of (1) the “filing date” of the information or indictment or (2) the defendant’s initial appearance before a judicial officer (i <?., the arraignment). § 3161(c)(1). The Act goes on to list a set of exclusions from the 70-day period, including “delay resulting from, any pretrial motion, from the filing of the motion through the conclusion of the hearing on, or other prompt disposition of, such motion.” § 3161(h)(1)(D) (2006 ed., Supp. Ill) (emphasis added). The United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit held in this case that a pretrial motion falls within this exclusion only if it “actually causefs] a delay, or the expectation of a delay, of trial.” 579 F. 3d 589, 598 (2009). In our view, however, the statutory exclusion does not contain this kind of causation requirement. Rather, the filing of a pretrial motion falls within this provision irrespective of whether it actually causes, or is expected to cause, delay in starting a trial. I Jason Louis Tinklenberg, the respondent, was convicted of violating federal drug and gun laws. 18 U. S. C. § 922(g)(1) (felon in possession of a firearm); 21 U. S. C. § 843(a)(6) (possession of…

Excerpt of a 26,064-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.

← Back to the decisions database