Bradley attorney Ty Howard was quoted in Law360 in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial does not extend to the sentencing phase.
“The decision forecloses one avenue of attack — the Speedy Trial Act — for a criminal defendant challenging a delay in sentencing. Nonetheless, the court seemed open to such a challenge on the alternative grounds of a due process. Ultimately, I think the decision’s practical effect will be minimal. As the unanimous opinion suggests, there was little textual support for such a challenge under the Speedy Trial Act. But convicted defendants awaiting sentencing still have options for challenging delay, whether under due process, as the court suggests, or potentially Fed. R. Crim. P. 32 or comparable state law. This decision lays the groundwork for that future case and perhaps the most interesting issue: If a delay does violate due process, what is the appropriate remedy?”
The complete article, “Attorneys React to High Court’s Speedy Trial Ruling,” appeared in Law360 on May 19, 2016.