Document: 431 U.S. 783 97 S.Ct. 2044 52 L.Ed.2d 752 UNITED STATES, Petitioner,v.Eugene LOVASCO, Sr. No. 75-1844. Argued March 21-22, 1977. Decided June 9, Rehearing Denied Oct. 3, See 434 881, 98 242. Syllabus More than 18 months after federal criminal offenses were alleged to have occurred, respondent was indicted for committing them. Beyond an investigative report made a month the crimes committed, little additional information developed in following 17 months. Claiming that preindictment delay, during which material defense testimony had been lost, deprived him of due process, moved dismiss indictment. The District Court, found delay not explained or justified and unnecessary prejudicial respondent, granted motion dismiss. Court Appeals affirmed, concluding it solely attributable Government's hope other participants crime would be discovered, unjustified. Held : erred affirming Court's dismissal Pp. 788-797. (a) Although Speedy Trial Clause Sixth Amendment is applicable only person has accused statutes limitations provide " 'the primary guarantee against bringing overly stale charges,' United States v. Marion, 404 307, 322, 92 455, 464, 30 468, those do fully define defendant's rights with respect events antedating indictment, Due Process limited role play protecting oppressive delay. 788-789. (b) While proof prejudice makes process claim ripe adjudication, does automatically validate such claim, reasons must also considered. 789-790. (c) To prosecute defendant good-faith as apparently existed this case, deprive even if his might somewhat prejudiced by lapse time. Prosecutors are under no duty file charges soon probable cause exists but before they satisfied will able establish suspect's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Nor there constitutional requirement filed sufficient evidence prove investigation complete. An immediate arrest indictment impair prosecutors' ability continue obtain indictments, pressure prosecutors into resolving doubtful cases favor early (and possibly unwarranted) prosecutions, preclude full consideration desirability prosecuting particular cases. 790-796. 8 Cir., 532 F.2d 59, reversed. Louis Gilden, St. Louis, respondent. John P. Rupp, Washington, D. C., petitioner. Mr. Justice MARSHALL delivered opinion Court. 1 We certiorari case consider circumstances Constitution requires dismissed because between commission offense initiation prosecution. 2 * On 6, 1975, possessing eight firearms stolen from mails, dealing without license. occurred July 25 August 31, 1973, more filed. Respondent 3 conducted hearing on respondent's at sought defense. In effort former proposition, presented Postal Inspector's prepared one stipulation concerning post-report progress probe. stated, brief, within first admitted Government agents he possessed then sold five guns, strong linking remaining three weapons.1 however, unable confirm refute guns car when returned visiting son, mail handler, work.2 Assistant Attorney entered indicated uncovered preparation report.3 4 defense, testified lost two witnesses witness, Tom Stewart, died year occurred. At claimed Stewart source guns. second brother, April 1974, completed. brother present called secure witnessed all sales. did state how aided willing testify.4 5 systematic explain its long expressly disagree, counsel's suggestion ended prepared. App. 9-10. prosecutor stated theory who access railroad terminal "possibly stolen," id., 17, responsible thefts, 13.5 Finally, elicited cryptic Inspector indicating "as these weapons involves individuals"; grand jury "in regard . (on) day itself"; spoken about four occasions. Id., 20. 6 Following hearing, brief order. court October 2, date report, "the relating charged him," 17-month "had justified" "unnecessary unreasonable." "(a)s result reason death witness behalf." Pet. Cert. 14a. Accordingly, 7 (1) appealed Eighth Circuit. inaction stating: "(T)here legitimate interest keeping open instant case. son worked Terminal Railroad mail. It position theft therefore further fact important. 9 ". time basis, contact Attorney's office throughout certain matters brought Federal Grand Jury prior determination should ." Brief 75-1852 (CA8), pp. 5-6. 10 accepted representation motivation majority nevertheless affirmed finding actions "unjustified, unnecessary, 61 (1976). established impaired loss Stewart's understood contend "were available support (respondent's) know mails." Ibid. possession counts divided vote.6 11 certiorari, 429 884, 233, 50 164, now reverse.7 II 12 (2, 3) 468 (1971), considered significance, purposes, lengthy held far concerned, wholly irrelevant, since our analysis language, history, purposes persuaded us "a formal else actual restraints imposed holding answer charge engage protections" provision. 320, S.Ct., 463.8 went note limitations, predictable, legislatively enacted limits prosecutorial guarantee, charges.' quoting Ewell, 383 116, 122, 86 773, 777, 15 627 (1966). But we acknowledge "statute (defendants') occurring indictment," U.S., 324, 465, 13 (4) seems argue bars prosecution whenever suffers proposition relies sentence Marion where, remanding "(e)vents trial may demonstrate prejudice, appellees' claims speculative premature." 326, 466. quoted establishes concrete valid. Indeed, pages earlier rejected argument advances here: 14 "(W)e need determine what resulting preaccusation delays Actual shortest most necessary delay; suggests every delay-caused detriment abort prosecution." 324-325, 465. (Footnotes omitted.) Thus clear generally element inquiry well accused. 16 (5, 6) sole here part others discovered participated F.2d, 61. concluded justify permit courts prosecutions simply disagree prosecutor's judgment seek Judges free, defining "due process," impose law enforcement officials "personal private notions" fairness "disregard bind judges their judicial function." Rochin California, 342 165, 170, 72 205, 209, 96 L.Ed. 183 (1952). Our task circumscribed. whether action complained here, compelling stand delayed investigate violates "fundamental conceptions justice lie base civil political institutions," Mooney Holohan, 294 103, 112, 55 340, 342, 79 791 (1935), community's sense fair decency," supra, 173, 210. Ham South Carolina, 409 524, 526, 93 848, 850, 35 46 (1973); Lisenba 314 219, 236, 62 280, 289, 166 (1941); Hebert Louisiana, 272 312, 316, 47 104, 71 270 (1926); Hurtado 110 516, 535, 111, 120, 28 232 (1884). (7) extended deviate justice" defer seeking indictments until believe guilty; indeed unprofessional conduct recommend less cause.9 equally obvious "would deleterious effect both upon society protect itself," 776. From perspective potential defendants, requiring commence undesirable increase likelihood unwarranted being filed, add defendants untried.10 These costs means insubstantial since, recognized accusation "interfere liberty, disrupt employment, drain financial resources, curtail associations, subject public obloquy, create anxiety him, family friends." 463. officials, unacceptable could make obtaining doubt impossible causing potentially fruitful sources evaporate exploited.11 And standpoint courts, unwise scarce resources consumed insubstantial, involve some parties acts.12 Thus, one's interests served initiate legally entitled so.13 (8) argued once assembled doubt, constitutionally required promptly, entire transaction Adopting rule, many same consequences adopting rule cause. 19 First, requisite participant numerous problems illegal act. instances, investigation, thereby preventing lawbreakers justice. cases, despite prosecution, multiple trials involving single set facts. Such place needless burdens courts. 20 Second, insisting conviction prosecutions. seldom clear-cut, persons often reach conflicting conclusions. example, least firearms, factual issue dispute knew U.S.C. § 1708. Not surprisingly, contained direct bearing issue. decision prosecute, therefore, necessarily subjective evaluation strength circumstantial credibility denial. Even weak appropriate, assurance reviewing agree. avoid risk subsequent feel constrained premature charges, disadvantages entail.14 21 charging decisions immediately assembling giving awesome entails, wide range factors addition order interest.15 guilt, deciding Again provides useful illustration. identity thieves convict possessory charged, crucial assessing culpability, distinguished legal guilt. If, show advance knowledge agreed, out paternal loyalty, help dispose them, decided especially over 60 years old record.16 Requiring clear, prevent awaiting decision. 22 (9) reluctant adopt absent command so. can find Fifth Amendment. view, fundamentally unlike undertaken "to gain tactical advantage accused," precisely so one-sided.17 Rather deviating elementary standards "fair abides them refuses completely promptly Penalizing subordinate goal "orderly expedition" "mere speed," Smith States, 360 1, 10, 991, 997, 1041 (1959). This require. hold 23 (10) postponed await results investigation. is, unfortunately, record, court's "finding" supported implicit explicit Appeals, continued deferred taking moreover, buttressed repeated assertions petition oral "that caused government's efforts identify offenses." 14.18 assume statements counsel good faith. light explanation, follows unfair. dismissing III 24 (11) conceded abstract require later, statement remains true. intervening few neither nor any lower sustained opportunity significance various delay.19 leave instance, applying settled principles discussed individual Reversed. 26 STEVENS, dissenting. 27 If record question decides today, I join well-reasoned opinion. am review facts disclosed traditional scope exercised issues fact. After thorough sides given submit "(t)he ha(d) (was) appeal, concurred, noting "supported evidence." 60-61 (CA8 1976). concurrent findings improper, my judgment, own investigation," ante, 796.1 29 That record.2 correctly points "no record," yet proceeds accept representations briefs offenses.' continuing forms foundation opinion, comes appellate process. As said unsworn court: "Manifestly, (such statements) cannot properly disposition case." Adickes Kress & Co., 398 144, 157-158, n. 16, 90 1598, 1608, 142. faith counsel, business basis matter incorporated record. approved relevant propositions: routine prosecution; (2) expects waited almost indictment; (3) defense; whatsoever explains reasonably infer merely busy important 31 easy one. Nevertheless, unless conclude imposes constraints power postpone filing suit convenience, affirm Appeals. A contrary "can tenable assumes right includes prompt hearing." Moody Daggett, 78, 91, 274, 281, 236 (Stevens, J., dissenting). speedy Anglo-American common-law tradition Magna Carta. 5, 281. came country embodied constitutions, see Massachusetts 1780, Part I, Art. XI, later Constitution. applied anxious inquiries Inspectors indicted, substantial offered justification honored. 32 honored kind, basic values Framers intended Amendment's trial, motivated Congress enact Act become nothing managerial considerations manipulate. 33 respectfully dissent. whom selling told actually he, turn, Martin Koehnken. Koehnken undercover search house others. Finally eighth gun David Northdruft (or Northdurft) agents, gun. dismiss, purchaser investigators "hot." learned another purchased 18. disagreed admissible related. event, piece received. 19. mentioned questioned He "was bad tomato" liable take shot me him." 13. mention either brother's illness several occasions inquire status establishing son's responsibility thefts. unanimously reversed fourth count license missing provided exculpatory charge. challenging Appeals' issue, argues assessed trial. argument, raised Absent exceptional circumstances, here. See, e. g., Duignan 274 195, 200, 566, 568, 996 (1927); Neely K. Eby Constr. 386 317, 330, 87 1072, 1080, 75 (1967). seemed suggest failure raise procedural excused proceedings "skewed" based Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 48(b), rehearing. Tr. Oral Arg. 7-8, 51. assuming regarding question, opening paragraph below remainder treated merits. issued Clause, rehearing squarely alternative ground en banc. holds permits district postindictment "limited post-arrest situations." 319, 462. Since arrested plainly basing Rule. ABA Code Professional Responsibility DR 7-103(A) (1969); Project Standards Criminal Justice, Prosecution Function 3.9 (App. Draft 1971). extent period strictly legislative action, see, 88 Stat. 2076, 3161 et seq. (1970 ed., Supp. V), accused, guilty escaping punishment move short it. statute, course, length post-accusation Cf. Watson, 423 411, 431, 820, 831, 598 (1976) (Powell, concurring) ("Good police practice postponing arrest, established, suspect surveillance otherwise develop jury"). Defendants adversely affected acts responsible, likely subjected growing occurrence. Hoffa 385 293, 310, 408, 417, 374 (1966), 325 18, 465 18: "There arrested. guess peril precise moment suspect, risking violation Fourth act too soon, wait long. Law officers call halt minimum cause, quantum fall amount conviction." addition, decide commenced, trace day-by-day each Maintaining daily records administrative burden prosecutors, greater 321 13, 464. Function, 3.9(b): "The obliged support. consistent decline notwithstanding exist conviction. Illustrative exercising discretion are: "(i) "(ii) harm offense; "(iii) disproportion authorized relation offender; "(iv) possible improper motives complainant; "(v) reluctance victim testify; "(vi) cooperation apprehension others; "(vii) availability jurisdiction." Of proved unavailing ultimately report. fortuity transform permissible impermissible noted approval "tactical" violate Clause. renews concession 32, expands "A showing incurred reckless disregard known suggesting appreciable mount effective defense," 32-33, 25. notes, recklessness 4, 8; 8, 38; 7, 47. Professor Amsterdam catalogued noninvestigative delay: "(P)roof depend informer maintains 'cover' surfacing dealt while disguised. (I)f back pending others, handling turn degree seeks. There including sinister ones, desire beginning wish 'club' defendant. "Additional partly control authorities. Offenses reported; identified offender apprehendable. (A)n weeks impaneling next jury. customary think natural inevitable assignment manpower priorities among investigations affect delays." Trial: Rights Remedies, Stan.L.Rev. 525, 527-728 (1975). Dickey Florida, 30, 45-46, 1564, 1572-1573, (1970) (BRENNAN, concurring). 'in absence very error.' Berenyi Immigration Director, 630, 635, 666, 670, 656, citing Graver Mfg. Co. Linde 336 271, 275, 69 537, 672. Jackson "seasoned wise Comstock Group Investors, 335 211, 214, 68 1454, 1456, 1911. examination transcript reveals produced why delayed. stipulated proceeded collected presentation proceed. surmised "(n)o except theft(s) .," 61, assumption borne hearing. oath, attorney theorized freight mails. Yet never shown much.

Category: 0