United States v. Wearing, No. 15-2730 (8th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendant conditionally plead guilty to one charge of being an inmate in possession of a prohibited object. The court rejected defendant's claim that the government violated his right to a speedy trial under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. 3161-3174, concluding that administrative segregation is not an arrest under the Sixth Amendment. Therefore, defendant was not arrested when placed into administrative segregation and his Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights had not yet attached and were not violated. The court also concluded that the district court did not err in denying his motion to dismiss based on the insufficiency of the indictment where the indictment provides notice of the date the offense occurred, notifies defendant that the offense occurred in a prison, and specified the prohibited object he was accused of possessing. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Court Description: Per Curiam - Before Gruender and Kelly, Circuit Judges, and Ericksen, District Judge] Criminal case - Criminal law. In a prosecution for possession of a weapon in federal prison, defendant's Speedy Trial Act claim is rejected; because defendant was not charged by complaint or otherwise, his placement in administrative segregation immediately after discovery of the weapon was not an arrest for purposes of the Act and did not trigger the Act's protections; administrative segregation is not an arrest under the Sixth Amendment and defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy trial rights did not attach when he was placed in administrative segregation; indictment was sufficient to provide defendant with notice. [ September 14, 2016
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.