No. 23-7623
IFP
Tags: criminal-procedure discovery due-process evidence-preservation exculpatory-evidence law-enforcement sixth-amendment speedy-trial warrant-execution
Latest Conference:
2024-09-30
Question Presented (from Petition)
Whether the failure to preserve potentially exculpatory evidence under the Trombetta and Youngblood standards, coupled with delays in trial proceedings, constitutes a violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial?
Whether law enforcement's application of Crim.R. 45 to extend the time limit for executing a warrant, in contravention of Crim.R. 41, constitutes a circumvention of a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, thus warranting review by this Court?
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether the failure to preserve potentially exculpatory evidence under the Trombetta and Youngblood standards, coupled with delays in trial proceedings, constitutes a violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial?
Docket Entries
2024-10-07
Petition DENIED.
2024-07-18
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/30/2024.
2024-07-01
Brief of Ohio in opposition submitted.
2024-07-01
Brief of respondent Ohio in opposition filed.
2024-05-29
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due July 3, 2024)
Attorneys
Estephen Castellon
Estephen Castellon — Petitioner
Ohio