Mr. Tigano’s listless prosecution began in July 2008 when agents from the Drug Enforcement Administration descended on his property in Cattaraugus, N.Y., an hour south of Buffalo, and discovered what the government described as a “hydroponic marijuana grow operation” of more than 1,000 plants. He and his father, Joseph Tigano Sr., were charged with marijuana distribution and were scheduled to appear in court in March 2009.

After the father asked for a brief delay, the parties met in Federal District Court in Buffalo that April. During the hearing, the opinion said, Mr. Tigano, 53, was eager to get things moving and reminded the court at least 10 times of his right to a speedy trial. The behavior struck his lawyer, Thomas Farley, as unusual. Mr. Farley requested that his client take a mental competency test.

Four months later, the results came back: Mr. Tigano was perfectly fit for trial. But he was also angry at Mr. Farley for having forced him to take the test and asked the court if he could represent himself. Another month went by as the court considered his request and assigned a “standby” lawyer to assist him. Then, in January 2010, the second lawyer asked for a competency test. Four months later, it produced the same result: Mr. Tigano was fine.

Over the next two years, the court said, Mr. Tigano’s case became mired in “confusion among judges” and various other “small neglects.” There were three different jurists handling different aspects of the case, and they often found themselves awaiting the others’ decisions. The government was also slow in turning over discovery material, according to the opinion. At one point, as an important hearing neared, a court reporter filed a transcript nearly four months late.

By July 2012, Mr. Tigano had finally had enough and agreed to open plea negotiations with the government. (His father pleaded guilty one year later and was sentenced to time served.) But even Mr. Tigano’s plea discussions were hindered by delays. The prosecutor on his case had been assigned another trial, and Mr. Tigano took a “back seat within the U.S. attorney’s office,” according to the opinion. Things were slowed down further when Mr. Tigano’s lawyer tried to persuade him to take the guilty plea, which he had started to have doubts about, complaining it was taking too long.