Barker v. Wingo

United States Supreme Court
407 U.S. 514 (1972)


Facts

Two suspects were arrested for killing an older couple. The state had a stronger case against Manning so it planned to try Manning first so that he would then testify at Barker’s (defendant) trial. The state encountered many problems with Manning’s trial. After six trials and four years, Manning was finally convicted of both murders. During this time, the state continued to request continuances in Barker’s trial. In all, it made 16 such requests. Upon the state’s twelfth request, Barker filed a motion to dismiss the indictment but his motion was denied and the continuance was granted. Barker then objected to the state’s fifteenth request for a continuance. By this time, Manning’s trials were over but the request was denied and the continuance granted because the state’s chief investigating officer was sick. The witness was still unable to testify when the new trial date came around so an additional continuance was granted. Barker again requested that the indictment be dismissed, specifying that his right to a speedy trial had been violated. His motion was denied. Finally the trial commenced and Barker was convicted. The state court of appeals affirmed the conviction. Barker petitioned the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals for habeas corpus but the court ruled that he had waived his right to a speedy trial for the entire period before he objected to the state’s fifteenth request for a continuance. The United States Supreme Court granted certiorari.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is for members only. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Issue

The issue section is for members only and includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Holding and Reasoning (Powell, J.)

The holding and reasoning section is for members only and includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Concurrence (White, J.)

The concurrence section is for members only and includes a summary of the concurring judge or justice’s opinion. To access this section, please login or give Quimbee a try, it's free to get started.

Here's why 10,000 law students rely on our case briefs:

  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners not other law students.
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet.
  • 7,515 briefs - keyed to 85 casebooks.
  • Uniform format for every case brief.
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language.
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions.
  • Ability to tag case briefs in an outlining tool.
  • Top-notch customer support.
Start Your Free Trial Now