20 results for 'cat:"Sex Offender" AND cat:"Speedy Trial"'.
J. Zahn finds the trial court properly denied defendant post-conviction relief on ineffective assistance grounds. He failed to show he was prejudiced by counsel's waiver of his right under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers to start his rape trial within 120 days, as his motions to dismiss the indictment and to change venue would have forced the continuance of the trial beyond that deadline. He also failed to show that having his own blackout expert could have lessened the impact of eyewitness testimony, the state's blackout expert or defendant's own statements that the victim was too intoxicated for consent, which defendant argued she gave even though she had blacked out. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Supreme Court, Judge: Zahn, Filed On: May 21, 2024, Case #: 49786-2022, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Anderson affirms the defendant's conviction on two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct. The district court did not abuse its discretion in scheduling the defendant's trial past the six-month deadline available under the Uniform Mandatory Disposition of Detainers Act, since it properly found good cause to continue the trial, namely repeated changes of defense counsel, administrative delays in providing notices to that counsel, and scheduling issues involving that counsel. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: May 8, 2024, Case #: A22-0570, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial
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. Wall finds a lower court properly invoked a crowded docket exception on behalf of a defendant. The defendant, who was charged with arranging a sexual encounter of a 17- year-old female, argued that he was entitled to a speedy trial. However, the State presented sufficient evidence in court that the motion was not unreasonable. Affirmed.
Court: Kansas Supreme Court, Judge: Wall, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: 123687, Categories: Evidence, sex Offender, 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. Wall finds a lower court properly convicted a defendant for commercial sexual exploitation of a child. The defendant, who paid a 17- year-old female to have sex with him after contacting her on Snapchat using the name "Wamma Jamma," argued that he was deprived of a speedy trial. However, the government sufficiently showed in court that the "crowded-docket exception" allowed it to order a single continuance for 30 days. Affirmed.
Court: Kansas Supreme Court, Judge: Wall, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 123687, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Child Victims
J. Reiber finds the trial court improperly dismissed a man’s charges of aggravated sexual assault and lewd or lascivious conduct with a child under 13 after a pre-indictment delay of 19 years. The man has not proved a sufficient claim of denial for any speedy trial violations. Therefore, the trial court’s dismissal of charges must be remanded for further proceedings. Reversed.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court, Judge: Reiber, Filed On: February 16, 2024, Case #: 23-AP-050, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Atkins finds that the trial court should not have denied the state's motion to continue trial in a sexual abuse of a minor action. In this case, the trial court did not take into consideration that the state's witnesses were not available on the trial date. One witness was the forensic nurse practitioner who completed a report in the matter, and the other witness was an expert in child sexual abuse forensic examinations, child sexual abuse, and trauma. Further, a continuance would not violate defendant's right to a speedy trial. Reversed.
Court: Louisiana Court Of Appeal, Judge: Atkins, Filed On: January 23, 2024, Case #: 2024-K-0034, Categories: Criminal Procedure, sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Ryan finds defendant's conviction for gross sexual imposition in relation to the mail carrier he grabbed was not supported by sufficient evidence. The only force involved in the crime was the act itself; therefore, the conviction will be modified to sexual imposition. Furthermore, because the 2-year delay in prosecuting defendant's case was largely the result of pandemic-related continuances, his claim for speedy trial violations is meritless. Affirmed in part.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Ryan, Filed On: December 7, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-4413, Categories: Evidence, sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Welch finds the county court properly denied defendant’s motion for absolute discharge on speedy trial grounds from charges of sexual assault of child. Defendant’s motion to continue constituted an effective waiver of his right to a speedy trial because the clock was not set to expire at that point, and the court’s granting of the motion resulted “in a ... delay that ... extended ... trial outside the speedy trial window.” Defendant’s assignment that excludable periods associated with delays caused by his own motions for continuances without admonishment fails. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Welch, Filed On: November 7, 2023, Case #: A-23-048, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Child Victims
J. Hoyle finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for aggravated sexual assault of his dating partner’s 11-year-old daughter. Though there were trial delays due to scheduling and Covid-19 concerns, defendant did not file a speedy trial motion until approximately 20 months after his arrest. He fails to demonstrate prejudice and the record does not support a finding that his ability to defend was compromised by delays. All testimony was corroborated and the court’s failure to conduct a reliability hearing was harmless. The child’s testimony is also supported by corroborating circumstantial evidence. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Hoyle, Filed On: September 1, 2023, Case #: 12-22-00180-CR, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Child Victims
J. Kruger finds that a sex offender's due process rights have not been violated even though a trial on a petition to indefinitely recommit him to the state hospital as a sexually violent predator has been pending since 2007. Constitutional speedy trial rights apply to petitions to recommit sex offenders under the Sexually Violent Predator Act, but a trial has not yet been held on a petition to recommit the offender that was filed in 2007.
The length of the delay indicates that both the state and the trial court should have worked harder to ensure the offender's due process right to a timely trial. But the offender did not demonstrate that he sought a trial on the petition before 2018 or that he suffered prejudice by the delay. Affirmed.
Court: California Supreme Court, Judge: Kruger, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: S273391, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Due Process
J. Powell grants the defendant's petition for a writ prohibiting the lower court from taking any further action in a pending criminal case accusing him of rape. The state waived any argument that defendant failed to properly invoke his speedy trial rights, so the Interstate Agreement on Detainers mandates the dismissal of his case after the court failed to conduct a trial within 180 days of his request. Affirmed.
Court: Missouri Supreme Court, Judge: Powell, Filed On: August 29, 2023, Case #: SC99949, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Lucci finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds. Competency hearings and defendant's numerous discovery motions tolled his speedy trial clock. Furthermore, although the victim admitted she had consensual sex with defendant several times during the course of events that led to his kidnapping and rape charges, the jury did not lose its way when it found her testimony about his actions credible and convicted him. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lucci, Filed On: August 28, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-3019, Categories: sex Offender, Kidnapping, speedy Trial
J. Bishop finds the trial court properly denied the sexual assault defendant’s motion for absolute discharge. The pendency of defendant’s motion for discovery made before the filing of the information tolled the running of the statutory speedy trial period. Relevant statute dictates the exclusion of all time between defendant’s filing of a pretrial motion and the final disposition on that motion, regardless of the promptness or reasonableness of the delay of disposition. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Bishop, Filed On: August 22, 2023, Case #: A-22-861, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Due Process
J. Waples finds the trial court correctly denied defendant's motion to suppress evidence and motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial on charges of sexual assault. Defendant's Article 11 rights were not violated by the warrantless search of his home, and the balance of the factors do not show there was a speedy trial violation. Affirmed.
Court: Vermont Supreme Court, Judge: Waples, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 21-AP-275, Categories: Evidence, sex Offender, speedy Trial
J. Palafox finds that a lower court properly denied defendant habeas relief and a motion to dismiss in a case involving child sexual abuse. Defendant argues that the victim improperly presented evidence that fell outside of his indictment and that prosecutors "increased charges against him solely because he exercised his lawful rights" by complaining about this, but in fact prosecutors chose to re-indict defendant based on new information. Defendant, rather than moving for a speedy trial, "instead requested a continuance." Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Palafox, Filed On: July 21, 2023, Case #: 08-22-00179-CR, Categories: sex Offender, speedy Trial, Child Victims