Court Opinion

ID: 9836101
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-02 02:57:15.219063+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:17:57.999124
License: Public Domain

KELLY, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the court’s opinion with one exception: As to the Sixth Amendment claim, I concur in the result only. The district court did not reach the issue of whether, for purposes of the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial, Wearing was arrested when he was placed in administrative segregation, and the parties did not fully brief this issue on appeal. Instead, the district court assumed an arrest, weighed the appropriate factors under Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 530, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972), and concluded Wearing’s right to a speedy trial was not violated.' On this issue, I would affirm on the grounds relied on by the district court. I would leave for another day, in a case in which the issue is fully presented for our review, the question of whether being placed . in administrative segregation may under any circumstances qualify for an arrest for purposes of an accused’s right to a speedy trial pursuant to the Sixth Amendment.