discussed Cited "see" United States v. Brian Matlock See Mason v. Groose, 942 F.2d 515, 516 (8th Cir.1991) (holding order that simply adopted magistrate’s report and recommendation by reference was separate document for purposes of Rule 58), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1039 , 112 S.Ct. 891 , 116 L.Ed.2d 794 (1992); see also Kidd v. District of Columbia, 206 F.3d 35, 41 (D.C.Cir.2000) (same), cert. denied, 531 U.S. 1071 , 121 S.Ct. 761 , 148 L.Ed.2d 663 (2001).

cited Cited "see" Hidalgo v. Kuhlman See Graham v. Hoke, 946 F.2d 982, 994 (2d Cir.1991), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 1039 , 112 S.Ct. 890 , 116 L.Ed.2d 793 (1992).

discussed Cited "see" 95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6562, 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 11,233 United States of America v. Kenneth M. Baker, United States of America v. Ralph Hale, United States of America v. Kenneth Baker Ralph Hale See United States v. Fuller, 942 F.2d 454, 457 (8th Cir.) (rejecting the defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy trial challenge because any delay was caused by his codefendants' various motions and, under the Speedy Trial Act, this time properly counts against the defendant), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 914 , 112 S.Ct. 315 , 116 L.Ed.2d 257 (1991) and 502 U.S. 1039 , 112 S.Ct. 890 , 116 L.Ed.2d 793 (1992). 108 The Constitution does not set a specific time period within which a trial must occur.

discussed Cited "see" United States v. Baker See United States v. Fuller, 942 F.2d 454, 457 (8th Cir.) (rejecting the defendant’s Sixth Amendment speedy trial challenge because any delay was caused by his codefendants’ various motions and, under the Speedy Trial Act, this time properly counts against the defendant), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 914 , 112 S.Ct. 315 , 116 L.Ed.2d 257 (1991) and 502 U.S. 1039 , 112 S.Ct. 890 , 116 L.Ed.2d 793 (1992).