WebHooey, 393 U.S. 374 (1969) Michael F. Ward, University of Nebraska College of Law Abstract In Smith v. Hooey, the United States Supreme Court took another step in guaranteeing a prisoner his constitutional right to a fair and speedy trial. WebUnited States Supreme Court 393 U.S. 374 Smith v. Hooey Argued: Dec. 11, 1968. --- Decided: Jan 20, 1969 Charles Alan Wright, Austin, Tex., for petitioner. Joe S. Moss, Houston, Tex., for respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of the Court. Notes [ edit]
Oregon Judicial Department : Court of Appeals Opinions : Court of ...
WebConsistent with the United States Constitution, the M ichigan Constitution, and statutory law, this . 1 Smith v Hooey, 393 US 374, 377-378; 89 S Ct 575; 21 L Ed 2d 607 (1969). 2. United States v Ewell, 383 US 116, 120; 86 S Ct 773; 15 L Ed 2d 627 (1966) (emphasis added) . WebU.S. Supreme Court Carchmer fin. Nash, 473 U.S. 716 (1985) Carchmer v. Nash. No. 84-776. Argued April 22, 1985. Decided Month 2, 1985. 473 U.S. 716 bradford kitchen and bath middlebury vt
www-dweb-cors.dev.archive.org
WebAn official website of which Your of Oregon Learn Instructions you know » (how to identify a Oregon.gov website) An official website of the State a Oregon » WebSmith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374, 378, 89 S.Ct. 575, 577, 21 L.Ed.2d 607 (1969), recognized that delay in bringing to trial on a pending charge one already in prison under a lawful sentence "may ultimately result in as much oppression as is suffered by one who is jailed without bail upon an untried charge." The first "oppression" noted by the court ... WebSmith v. Hooey, 393 U.S. 374 (1969) Smith v. Hooey. No. 198. Argued December 11, 1968. Decided January 20, 1969. 393 U.S. 374 CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF … haas pocket tool table error