## Facts

- Clarence Eugene Strunk was indicted and later convicted in federal court for transporting a stolen automobile from Wisconsin to Illinois in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2312.
- The district court denied Strunk’s pretrial motion to dismiss based on an alleged Sixth Amendment speedy-trial violation.
- Strunk received a five-year federal sentence, ordered to run concurrently with a Nebraska state sentence of one to three years he was already serving.
- A substantial pretrial delay occurred, including 259 days between indictment and arraignment.
- The Seventh Circuit held Strunk had been denied a speedy trial but declined to dismiss the charges and instead remanded for a 259-day reduction of the sentence as compensation for the delay.
- The government did not seek review of the finding that a speedy-trial violation occurred; review focused only on the remedy.

## Issues

1. After a court determines that the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial has been violated, may the court remedy the violation by reducing the sentence rather than vacating the conviction and dismissing the indictment?

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the Seventh Circuit.
- The Court held that dismissal of the indictment is the only constitutionally permissible remedy once a speedy-trial violation is found.
- The case was remanded for proceedings consistent with vacating the conviction, vacating the sentence, and dismissing the indictment.

## Legal Principles

- When a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial has been violated, the sole adequate remedy is to reverse the conviction, vacate the sentence, and dismiss the indictment.
- Sentence reduction and other partial or compensatory remedies cannot cure the harms addressed by the speedy-trial guarantee, including oppressive pretrial incarceration, anxiety and concern, and impairment of the defense.
- The speedy-trial right protects both the accused’s interests and the public interest in prompt disposition of criminal cases; allowing a conviction to stand after a violation is found is incompatible with those purposes.

## Conclusion

The Court held that, once a Sixth Amendment speedy-trial violation has been judicially determined, dismissal of the prosecution is mandatory; courts may not attempt to remedy the violation by reducing the defendant’s sentence.


Strunk v. United States, 412 U.S. 434 (1973)