No. 19-5768

Steven Villalona v. Florida

Lower Court: Florida
Docketed: 2019-08-30
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: barker-v-wingo constitutional-law criminal-procedure detainer due-process prisoner-rights rehabilitative-programs sixth-amendment smith-v-hooey speedy-trial
Latest Conference: 2019-10-18
Question Presented (from Petition)

(1) What effect, if any, does the filing of a detainer have on a
prisoner's right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment?

(2) To what degree are the three basic demands of criminal justice
under the Sixth Amendment speedy trial right "aggravated and
compounded," in a case of an accused under a state charge who
is imprisoned by another jurisdiction? See Smith v. Hooey , 393
U.S. 374 (1969).

(3) What effect does an accused's imprisonment by another state
have on a Barker v. Wingo , 407 U.S. 514 (1972), speedy trial
analysis?

(4) Does the filing of a detainer relieve prosecuting officials
under the Sixth Amendment, to provide an accused of the duty
with a speedy trial?

(5) Does the denial of access to rehabilitative programs constitute
oppressive pretrial incarceration in a Barker analysis?

(6) What constitutes an assertion of a prisoner's right to a speedy
trial under the Sixth Amendment?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

What effect, if any, does the filing of a detainer have on a prisoner's right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment?

Docket Entries

2019-10-21
Petition DENIED.
2019-10-03
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 10/18/2019.
2019-09-30
Waiver of right of respondent Florida to respond filed.
2019-08-26
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due September 30, 2019)

Attorneys

Florida
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Steven Villalona
Steven Justin Villalona — Petitioner