U.S. v. Patterson

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss his 2012 indictment on drug and firearm charges on grounds that prosecution violated Speedy Trial Act, even though his trial did not start until September of 2015. While defendant argued that delays in transporting him to facility to evaluate his competency or in generating report concerning his competency counted toward applicable 70-day period for bringing case to trial, none of said delays counted toward said period, where: (1) some delays occurred during timeframe where co-defendants had obtained excludable continuances; and (2) other delays occurred during timeframe when defendant’s competency to stand trial was being evaluated. Also, defendant failed to establish any 6^th Amendment speedy trial violation, where: (1) delays caused by his transportation to mental health facility and generation of court report resulted in nothing more than bureaucratic negligence and occurred partially during time when defendant’s competency was being evaluated; (2) defendant failed to assert any speedy trial right until after delays at issue had occurred; and (3) defendant had failed to offer any specific evidence of prejudice arising out of said delays, and instant pretrial delay was primarily caused by factors outside govt. control.