---
canonical_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qdc3513d076a6f0d40eca"
batch_url: "https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000122"
content_type: discussion_message
speaker: "roy***"
date: "2026-06-19T04:32:27.107Z"
---

# roy*** 发言 (2026-06-19)

围绕郭文贵案的社区讨论与观点交锋。发言仅代表讨论者观点，不等同于法院认定。

批次：[查看所在归档批次](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/batches/batch-000122)
时间：2026-06-19T04:32:27.107Z
回复：[q9e1755109713c977b785](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9e1755109713c977b785) (查看被回复的发言（跨批次）)

被回复发言摘要：
> * A "Waiting Game" for Appellate Guidance: If there is a parallel mandamus petition or emergency stay sitting before the Circuit Court, a District Judge will often intentionally halt all district-level activity. They do nothing because they are waiting to see if the higher court is going to issue a ruling that strips them of jurisdiction or changes the legal landscape.
> 2. Controlling Precedents: The Constitutional Limits of Delay
> Under federal law, a judge cannot delay a sentencing indefinitely. The Supreme Court and the Second Circuit have established clear boundaries regarding what constitutes a prejudicial or unconstitutional sentencing delay.
> The Constitutional Standard: Betterman v. Montana (2016)
> The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Betterman v. Montana, 578 U.S. 437 (2016) that the Sixth Amendment’s Speedy Trial Clause does not apply to post-conviction sentencing delays. Instead, the Court ruled that the Due Process Clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments protects defendants against excessive, unreasonable delays in sentencing. If a delay is found to be reckless, purposeful, or cause severe prejudice to the parties (such as keeping a defendant incarcerated under a cloud of unresolved errors), it violates constitutional Due Process.
> The Analytical Framework: United States v. Ray (2d Cir. 2009)

## 发言正文

> 一、当前局面的本质：District Judge 在玩“Waiting Game”
> 你说得非常对。
> 当二巡手里有平行 mandamus（Tony、Chunk Chyi、Anna、蒋帮芝等）或者紧急 stay 动议时，地区法官（Torres）最常见的策略就是什么都不做。
> 原因：
> •  如果她现在强行推进量刑程序，万一二巡后来下令要求她先解决某些程序问题（docket、听证、补记录），她之前的量刑就可能被推翻。
> •  如果她现在什么都不做，把球踢给二巡，等二巡表态后再行动，风险最低。
> •  这就是典型的 “Waiting Game” —— 用时间把压力转嫁给上级法院。
> Tony 6月17日那份动议里反复强调的“一个多月没有任何程序动作”，其实就是在精准攻击 Torres 的这个策略。
> 二、宪法红线：Betterman v. Montana + United States v. Ray
> 虽然 Betterman v. Montana, 578 U.S. 437 (2016) 明确说 Sixth Amendment Speedy Trial Clause 不适用于量刑阶段，但最高法院同时指出：