"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State
and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defense." Which of the following possible court cases could legitimately be argued under the terms of the quote above?
1) A person complains that the court ignored evidence relevant to the case which affected the outcome.
2) A person says that the lawyer appointed by the court has too many cases to handle at one time.
3) A person accuses a judge of extending court dates too long for each side to gather evidence.
3) a person accuses the judge of extending court dates too long for each side to gather evidence.
This can be argued based on the first part "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial" because if they keep extending the court date then the first part (right to a speedy trial) wil have been violated
