United States v. Miguel Doningo Gregory

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 2812·322 F.3d 1157·2003 WL 943586·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2188·2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 4179
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 11, 200301-10737California3,888 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fisher, J.

Because the government chose to bring a delayed superseding indictment against the appellant, Miguel Doningo Gregory, we must resolve two constitutional challenges Gregory invoked in the district court, resulting in that court’s dismissal of the government’s most recent indictment charging Gregory with money laundering. In October 1999, the government indicted Gregory on drug charges. Gregory pled guilty to the charges and was sentenced to 247 days in prison, eight months of home detention and three years of supervised release. Then in March 2001, while Gregory was on home detention after serving his prison time, the government issued a third superseding indictment charging Gregory with money laundering in connection with the same drug deals that had landed him in prison. Finding Gregory was prejudiced by the government’s negligence in delaying the money laundering charges, the district court dismissed the third superseding indictment as violating the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial guarantee and the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The government now appeals.

We conclude that whatever the merits of the government’s decision to issue a delayed third superseding…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.