U.S. v. Johnson

Dist. Ct. did not err in denying defendant’s motion to dismiss his federal drug and firearm charges on speedy trial grounds. Instant trial took place within 70-day period set forth in Speedy Trial Act, and said trial did not violate any constitutional right to speedy trial. Moreover, plaintiff could not attribute to his federal case over year long delay after he was arrested on similar state-court charges, where defendant failed to establish any collusion between state and federal officials to deny defendant his speedy trial right. Also, Ct. of Appeals rejected defendant’s contention that Dist. Ct. denied his right to testify on his own behalf at his trial, where defendant received late notice of existence of video of his proffer, and where Dist. Ct. allowed prosecution to use proffer for impeachment purposes if defendant decided to testify. Ct. found that defendant had choice to testify if he wanted to, and record showed that defendant made choice not to testify after he had viewed video proffer. Too, while government witness improperly made reference to defendant’s admission to one charged offense that was contained in proffer, any error was harmless, given overwhelming nature of defendant’s guilt on said offense.