21 results for 'cat:"Murder" AND cat:"Speedy Trial"'.
J. Pitman finds that the trial court properly released defendant, who was charged with murder, without bail because La. C. Cr. P. art. 701 relieves a defendant from his bail obligation on the running of the time period for speedy trial. However, defendant's right to a speedy trial was not violated because there is no time limitation on a murder charge, and, in this case, the length of the delay did not prejudice defendant since there was a detainer in Mississippi requiring his transfer to serve an outstanding sentence. Affirmed in part.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Pitman, Filed On: April 10, 2024, Case #: 55,609-KA, Categories: Criminal Procedure, murder, speedy Trial
J. Cabret finds the superior court committed no error in denying defendant's habeas corpus petition he filed after he was convicted of rape, murder and other charges and sentenced to life in prison. There is nothing in the record to suggest that defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was violated, in part because although the superior court incorrectly found that six of the 11 delays that caused a 27-month gap between defendant's arrest and trial were the fault of defendant, the delays caused by the prosecution were largely out of its control or due to negligence that does not support defendant's claims. Affirmed.
Court: Virgin Islands Supreme Court, Judge: Cabret, Filed On: April 3, 2024, Case #: 2024 VI 16, Categories: Habeas, murder, speedy Trial
J. Stephens finds that the lower court improperly reversed defendant's murder conviction. The lower court found that because the state wrongfully delayed bringing charges against defendant, the resulting loss of key witness testimony violated defendant's due process rights. While the state was negligent in its delay, there is no proof that that defendant suffered any prejudice from the loss of witness testimony. Reversed.
Court: Washington Supreme Court, Judge: Stephens, Filed On: March 28, 2024, Case #: 101502-0, Categories: murder, speedy Trial, Due Process
J. Pinson finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of rape and murder. Sufficient evidence was presented to support defendant's convictions, including evidence that one victim was found beaten by the side of a road with defendant's sperm in her vagina and that defendant's conduct accelerated her death from cocaine intoxication. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the rape charge with respect to the second victim on speedy trial grounds. Defendant failed to show that he was prejudiced by the delay of more than a decade between his indictment and trial for the second victim's rape. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Pinson, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: S23A0927, Categories: murder, Sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Boggs finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder, burglary, kidnapping, child cruelty and firearm offenses. The trial court correctly rejected defendant's speedy trial claim because defendant was more to blame for the delay than the state and was not prejudiced by the delay. There was a period of one year and seven months between the order granting defendant a new trial and the start of his fourth trial. Defendant claimed the delay should be measured from his initial arrest to the start of the fourth trial--a time period of about 27 years--in light of the Brady violations by the state in his previous trials. Defendant entered a consent order and thereby waived his argument that periods before the order should be included in the length of the delay. The trial court correctly excluded evidence of alleged police and prosecutorial bias against defendant. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Boggs, Filed On: March 5, 2024, Case #: S23A1091, Categories: murder, speedy Trial
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Holmes finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of murder and unlawful firearm possession as part of his involvement in the Syndicato de Nuevo
México, a prison gang. Defendant claims that the lower court violated his right to a speedy trial and allowed prejudicial evidence during trial, but his claims are without merit. Any prejudice injected into proceedings from certain murder evidence did not outweigh its overall value and was properly allowed, and the duration of his legal proceedings did not violate the Speedy Trial Act. Affirmed.
Court: 10th Circuit, Judge: Holmes, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 22-2034, Categories: murder, speedy Trial, Gangs
J. Miller-Lerman finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for second-degree murder. Surveillance video and witness testimony shows defendant, during an extended gun battle occurring between a house and vehicles, shot and killed the victim. The trial court properly denied his motion to withdraw his no contest plea, while the record is insufficient to consider claims of ineffective assistance or discharge on speedy trial grounds. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Miller-Lerman, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: S-23-124, Categories: Evidence, murder, speedy Trial
J. LaGrua finds that the trial court incorrectly denied defendant's speedy trial claim following his murder and aggravated assault convictions. There was a 25-month delay between defendant's September 2016 arrest and his October 2018 trial. Although the trial court found that the delay was unusually long, it failed to weigh the reason for the delay as its own factor against the state. The delay was due to a backlog at the state crime lab. Defendant also did not request a delay of the trial when he requested more time to prepare for his probation revocation. Vacated.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: LaGrua, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: S23A1018, Categories: murder, speedy Trial
J. Rowland finds the trial court improperly convicted defendant for first-degree murder. Though defendant originally requested to represent himself, then agreed to have counsel appointed after admonishment, any obstructionist or delay tactics did not occur until after his second request to defend himself, which was denied. The record does not support the state's assertion that defendant's requests were attempts at delay. Reversed.
Court: Oklahoma Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Rowland , Filed On: December 21, 2023, Case #: F-2021-1390, Categories: murder, speedy Trial, Self Representation
J. Thomson finds the court of appeals improperly reversed defendant's murder and tampering with evidence convictions, received after he repeatedly stabbed his girlfriend. While the 69-month delay between defendant's indictment and trial on murder charges was presumptively prejudicial, it did not constitute a violation of his speedy trial rights. The majority of the delay was caused by numerous competency hearings, several of which were conducted after defendant was declared incompetent, at which point the state could not continue with a trial. Furthermore, his segregation from the general population in prison was a result of his own violent outbursts and, therefore, did not unduly prejudice him. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Supreme Court, Judge: Thomson, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: S-1-SC-37879, Categories: Competence, murder, speedy Trial
[Consolidated.] Per curiam, the circuit finds that even though defendants did not travel outside the state of Michigan or make phone calls to anyone outside the state during the commission of their murder-for-hire crimes, the use of cell phones, considered instrumentalities of interstate commerce, allowed the government to charge and convict them under the federal murder-for-hire statute. Meanwhile, although more than 15 months passed between defendants' arrest and their subsequent trial, the delay did not violate their right to a speedy trial. The delay was caused, in large part, by an overcrowded docket that stemmed from the Covid-19 pandemic and extensions requested by their own attorneys to handle the large amount of discovery and the potential death penalty implications of their crimes. Affirmed.
Court: 6th Circuit, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 22-1698, Categories: murder, speedy Trial, Jurisdiction
J. Harris finds that defendant's speedy trial rights were not violated because most of the nearly three-year delay before her assault and murder trial was attributable to her and she was late to assert the right. The trial court properly held that defendant's mother could not give alibi testimony because she was not included in defendant's notice of alibi. She opened the door to previously excluded statements when counsel asked a detective detailed questions about his aggressive questioning techniques and defendant's responses. Also, she failed to preserve her sentencing challenge. Affirmed.
Court: Utah Court Of Appeals, Judge: Harris, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 20210242-CA, Categories: Evidence, murder, speedy Trial
J. Alvarez upholds defendant's guilty-plea conviction for the murder of his mother. His right to a speedy trial was not violated, as he never requested a speedy trial and the record indicates defendant's "strategic motivation was always to achieve a favorable plea or a dismissal." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Alvarez, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: 04-22-00030-CR , Categories: murder, Plea, speedy Trial
J. Moeller finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant in a second retrial of murdering two people at a campsite in 1985. The state's late disclosure of prison phone calls made by defendant's brother, which were not admitted into evidence, did not prejudice defendant, and it was within the trial court's discretion to allow the state to question the brother about the content of the calls as prior inconsistent statements. Statements made by the trial court in the first retrial did not express principle or a rule of law, so the law of the cases doctrine did not apply to them. His speedy trial rights were not violated by the second retrial, which came more than 25 months after the first retrial was declared a mistrial, since he caused most of the delay and it did not result in prejudice. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Moeller, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: 47522, Categories: Evidence, murder, speedy Trial
J. Keough finds that defendant's failure to make specific claims about how pretrial delays that stemmed mainly from the Covid-19 pandemic prejudiced him requires dismissal of the speedy trial claim in his appeal. Meanwhile, the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to sever his assault charge from the murder charge. While the investigations for both incidents, which occurred on the same night in close proximity to one another, were intertwined, the evidence for each count was separate and distinct, and would not confuse the jury. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Keough, Filed On: July 6, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2294, Categories: Criminal Procedure, murder, speedy Trial
J. Bethel finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of murder, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, possession of marijuana with intent to distribute and other offenses. Any error the trial court committed in admitting statements made by the victim as dying declarations identifying defendant as the shooter was harmless. There was evidence showing that the victim believed his death to be imminent when he first identified the shooters, including evidence that the victim was almost completely paralyzed and was aware of the seriousness of his condition. The trial court correctly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment for want of a speedy trial due to a 30-month delay. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Supreme Court, Judge: Bethel, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: S23A0135, Categories: murder, speedy Trial
J. Arterburn finds the trial court properly denied defendant’s motion for absolute discharge on speedy trial grounds of his convictions for two counts of first-degree murder, two counts of use of a firearm to commit a felony, two counts of possession of a firearm by a prohibited person and one count of possession with intent to deliver cocaine. The speedy trial clock has been tolled due to defendant’s retained counsel’s filing of pretrial motions to depose witnesses which have yet to be resolved due to ongoing issues between defendant and his counsel. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Arterburn, Filed On: May 16, 2023, Case #: A-22-691, Categories: Drug Offender, murder, speedy Trial