1. Whether a state Court may benefit, gaming Ane advantage
of a ceskact On ne Speedy Trial clock (ice indefinitely
Post porin 9 prosecuticni, over Mane accessed Ob yecrron, WY Nollc- Proseg
and ce- indickment of He Same entack charges, Knowing He accused
Would Camara V9 custody 2

2. Whether a State Court may gain a cestart on tne Speedy Trial
Choc by nolle-prosequy of Be Charges using Continuance Ceasons,
Staking Tk would Fucther invests nore and ceindick accused, Over accused
, ob yecrion, while Mae acevSed femained in tu stody under Hae Candirxiens
of ke nolle -grosequs Charges, buk had or a Show Cause (nm Connechen
7 i]
© Same Criminal episode) as ne selle- prosequs Charges .

Whether a state court may indefinitely postpone prosecution over the accused's objection by nolle-prosequi and re-indictment of the same charges, knowing the accused would remain in custody