Skip to content


United States Vs. Cotton - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtUS Supreme Court
Decided On
Case Number397 U.S. 45
AppellantUnited States
RespondentCotton
Excerpt:
united states v. cotton - 397 u.s. 45 (1970) u.s. supreme court united states v. cotton, 397 u.s. 45 (1970) united states v. cotton no. 1022 decided february 24, 1970 397 u.s. 45 appeal from the united states district court for the eastern district of wisconsin syllabus appeal dismissed. per curiam. the motion of the appellees for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. the motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for failure to docket the case within the time prescribed by rule 13. mr. justice douglas, dissenting. the requirement for filing the record in an appeal within the time prescribed by rule 13 is not jurisdictional. rather, it is a provision of our own rule which we.....
Judgment:
United States v. Cotton - 397 U.S. 45 (1970)
U.S. Supreme Court United States v. Cotton, 397 U.S. 45 (1970)

United States v. Cotton

No. 1022

Decided February 24, 1970

397 U.S. 45

APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

Syllabus

Appeal dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

The motion of the appellees for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is granted. The motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed for failure to docket the case within the time prescribed by Rule 13.

MR. JUSTICE DOUGLAS, dissenting.

The requirement for filing the record in an appeal within the time prescribed by Rule 13 is not jurisdictional. Rather, it is a provision of our own Rule which we often waive in the interests of justice. We should waive it here. The appeal now dismissed was solely protective under 18 U.S.C. § 3731. The main remedy sought was mandamus in the Court of Appeals, and the record naturally went to that court, not here. The issue tendered by the appeal now dismissed is whether the District Court properly dismissed the indictment, because there could be no "fair trial" in the district at that time, and that, if a continuance was granted, appellees would be denied a speedy trial guaranteed by the Constitution.

That is an important question we should hear and decide.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //