Criminal Procedure — IAD

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7^th Circuit

Criminal

Criminal Procedure — IAD

As long as the original charges are not lodged in bad faith or fraudulently as a basis for obtaining a detainer, or the later-added charges are not improperly delayed to avoid the strictures of the IAD, nothing prevents the addition of new charges.

“Suppose the government had taken Clark’s view of the matter and had tried him only on the charges that supported the detainer. Surely Clark does not mean that the government was forever barred from bringing the additional charges related to the other five bank robberies. Once the first trial was over, the government could have sought a new indictment (assuming no statute-of-limitations problem) and proceeded with a new trial, maybe even under a new detainer. But what sense would there be in such a rule? The purpose of the IAD is to ‘prevent competing jurisdictions from transferring prisoners back and forth, because such transfers can undermine the prisoner’s right to a speedy trial and the rehabilitative process of the system in which the prisoner is currently serving a sentence.’ United States v. Jones, 938 F.2d 447, 448 (3d Cir. 1991).”

Affirmed.

12-2627 U.S. v. Clark

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Gilbert, J., Wood, J.