The following excerpt is from United States v. Heredia-Valdivia, CASE NO. 11-CR-3251-JM, Doc. No. 16 (S.D. Cal. 2011):
to the government.1 Second, the government argues that dismissal of the indictment is not an appropriate remedy for a Rule 5 violation. (See Doc. No. 17 pp. 3-4 (citing United States v. Savchenko, 201 F.R.D. 503, 506 (S.D. Cal. 2001) ("The appropriate remedy for a violation of the 'without unnecessary delay' standard of Rule 5 is the suppression of any prejudicial statements provided by the accused during the subject period.")).) Finally, the government also contends that Defendant has failed to demonstrate any "outrageous government conduct" that would rise to the level of a due process violation. The government also contends that any extended delay at the border was the result of administrative necessities. The government's response does not address Defendant's request for a writ of prohibition.
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.