By Jared S. Buszin and Harry Sandick on November 17, 2017
In United States v. Tigano, No. 15-3073 the Second Circuit issued a short order reversing the conviction and dismissing the indictment with prejudice.
The case has drawn attention for the speedy trial claim that the defen-dant had raised on appeal, and it ap-pears that this was the basis for rever-sal. Mr. Tigano was arrested in July 2008 and charged with various counts related to operating a marijuana farm near Buffalo, New York; however, he was not tried until May 2015—nearly seven years later—based on a variety of factors. One of the most significant factors contributing to the delay was the notorious backlog of cases in the Western District of New York. The backlog was not the only apparent reason for the extraordinary delay in trying Mr. Tigano. Other factors included delayed plea negotiations, a court reporter taking four months to prepare the transcript for a daylong hearing, and an extended competency hearing. Although he was sentenced to a 20-year mandatory minimum sentence, the Court’s order resulted in Mr. Tigano’s release after he had spent seven years in jail during the pretrial process and two years in prison after his conviction.
Commentary
Did the fact that it was a marijuana case and the defendant had been incarcerated for seven years a factor in the decision? I can’t help but believe it did. The reversal would be the first time in decades that the Circuit has reversed a conviction on speedy trial grounds. The case thus serves as a reminder of the importance of marshaling a compelling factual narrative, which can go a long way in advancing legal arguments that are ordinarily difficult to win. Although the facts here are extraordinary, it seems likely that other defendants have waited too long for their day in court. Only additional resources for our criminal justice system will address this systemic problem. It also teaches that court congestion and plea-bargaining will not always toll the Speedy Trial clock.
David Zapp & Johanna Zapp