42 U.S.C. § 1992
Speedy trial
Whenever the President has reason to believe that offenses have been, or are likely to be committed against the provisions of section 1990 of this title or of section 5506 to 5516 and 5518 to 5532 of the Revised Statutes, within any judicial district, it shall be lawful for him, in his discretion, to direct the judge, marshal, and United States attorney of such district to attend at such place within the district, and for such time as he may designate, for the purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial of persons so charged, and it shall be the duty of every judge or other officer, when any such requisition is received by him to attend at the place and for the time therein designated.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case (1 in the last 5 years), 2023–2023 · leading case: McConahie v. City of Waverly, Tennessee (M.D. Tenn. 2023).
McConahie v. City of Waverly, Tennessee (M.D. Tenn. 2023). “13, 2009) (holding that a plaintiff could not state a cognizable claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1992 ). Regardless of the cited statute, moreover, a federal civil rights case is not the proper vehicle for a state pretrial detainee to raise a speedy trial claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.