115 results for 'cat:"Speedy Trial"'.
J. Easterbrook finds that the lower court properly rejected defendant's claim he was denied a speedy trial due to the general order that suspended criminal jury trials from March 2020 through April 2021 due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Social and epidemiological considerations permitted the delay of criminal jury trials during the pandemic and district judges may rely on institutional findings such as the general order without making defendant-specific findings in such circumstances. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Easterbrook, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: 22-2470, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Jury, speedy Trial
J. Cassel finds the trial court properly overruled defendant's motion for absolute discharge of his felony offense on speedy trial grounds. Though defendant contends his waiver of speedy trial rights applies only to a continuance granted solely at the request of the defendant and not the state, this argument has no merit. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Supreme Court, Judge: Cassel , Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: S-23-356, Categories: speedy Trial, Due Process
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
Per curiam, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirms a judgment denying relief to a woman charged with violating a harassment prevention order. The rulings she’s challenging can be addressed through an appeal if she is convicted, but the denial of a motion to dismiss in a criminal case isn’t appealable until after the trial has concluded. Affirmed.
Court: Massachusetts Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: February 23, 2024, Case #: SJC-13508, Categories: speedy Trial, Harassment
J. McFadden finds that the trial court properly convicted defendant of interstate interference with an adoptive grandfather's lawful custody of his 16-year-old grandchild. Although the trial court wrongly found that the 26-month delay between defendant's arrest and trial due to the Covid-19 pandemic was not presumptively prejudicial, defendant failed to show that the denial of his motion for discharge and acquittal based on an alleged speedy trial violation was an abuse of discretion. The trial court correctly admitted evidence of defendant's sex acts with the grandchild. However, the trial court incorrectly ordered defendant to register as a sex offender as a condition of his sentence. Although the grandchild was under the age of 18, the victim of defendant's interference offense was the grandfather. Affirmed in part.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: McFadden, Filed On: February 22, 2024, Case #: A23A1319, Categories: Sentencing, 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. Klappenbach finds the trial court properly convicted defendant for battery and endangering the welfare of a minor. Because more than three years had passed between his arrest and his motion to dismiss, this constituted a prima facie violation of defendant's right to a speedy trial. The court correctly set forth its reasoning why certain time periods were excluded for good cause due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Relevant rules of procedure do not require the court to make a determination of good cause for delay until a speedy trial allegation is made, and defendant was provided ample opportunity to object. Affirmed.
Court: Arkansas Court Of Appeals, Judge: Klappenbach , Filed On: February 21, 2024, Case #: CR-22-778, Categories: Battery, speedy Trial, Child Victims
J. McGrath finds the district court improperly upheld the justice court’s denial of a woman’s motion to dismiss for lack of speedy trial when she was charged with six misdemeanor traffic violations. This court holds the state failed to demonstrate good cause for the delay after the woman’s trial was held without her present. Reversed.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: McGrath, Filed On: February 20, 2024, Case #: DA 21-0645, Categories: speedy Trial, Due Process, Civil Rights
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. 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. 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. 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. Lynch finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of assault in a knife attack on his then-girlfriend and infant son. No speedy trial violations occurred when the prosecution filed newly required certificates of good-faith compliance in declaring readiness for trial, even if not every item of discovery sought had been turned over. Affirmed.
Court: New York Appellate Divisions, Judge: Lynch, Filed On: February 8, 2024, Case #: 113125, Categories: Assault, speedy Trial, Discovery
J. Medina finds the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear the state's appeal of a magistrate's suppression of all prosecution witnesses during defendant's DUI case. The state filed the appeal before the magistrate court entered a decision on the merits of the motion. However, the district court was required to conduct an analysis of any possible speedy trial violations before it dismissed the charges refiled by the state, and so the case will be remanded. Reversed.
Court: New Mexico Court of Appeals, Judge: Medina, Filed On: February 6, 2024, Case #: A-1-CA-40849, Categories: Criminal Procedure, speedy Trial, Jurisdiction
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. Alley finds a lower court did not err in convicting defendant of capital murder after defendant — who was arrested in early 2018 but not tried until late 2022 — invoked his right to a speedy trial. While the delay here was indeed “extraordinary” and “should be the rare exception and not the rule,” much of the delay “stemmed from factors outside anyone’s control,” including disruptions from the Covid pandemic, and defendant did not raise his speedy trial right until 2022. Furthermore, much of the stress faced by defendant was caused not by delays but by the seriousness of the charges against him, which involved killing two people, including a minor. Affirmed.
Court: Texas Courts of Appeals, Judge: Alley, Filed On: January 31, 2024, Case #: 08-23-00026-CR, Categories: Constitution, speedy Trial, Due Process
J. Hart finds the lower court improperly convicted the defendant for witness tampering. The government waited 60 days, 30 days too long, past his arrest for drug and sex trafficking to charge him with witness tampering for assaulting a prostitute he told not to testify against him in court. Vacated.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Richardson, Filed On: January 25, 2024, Case #: 20-4534, Categories: Drug Offender, speedy Trial, Witnesses
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. Richardson finds the lower court properly convicted the defendant of drug trafficking charges. The defendant is not eligible for relief through the speedy trial provision despite it taking nearly two years from his arrest to his trial because it excludes any period of delay caused by a continuance, so long as the court grants the continuance because it serves the ends of justice and the court sets forth its reasoning on the record. Between the COVID-19 pandemic, the defendant going through four attorneys, and incompetency proceedings, the court had plenty of reason to delay the trial. Affirmed.
Court: 4th Circuit, Judge: Richardson, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: 22-4209, Categories: Competence, Drug Offender, speedy Trial
J. Mayle finds that even though defendant's fingerprints were not found on drug paraphernalia and he was not physically in the hotel room where the drugs were seized, his convictions for drug possession were not against the weight of the evidence because testimony from several codefendants conclusively established he used his vehicle to transport shipments from suppliers to the hotel room and, therefore, had constructive possession of the drugs. Meanwhile, the delays in defendant's trial were caused by illnesses and his own attorney's motions for continuances, all of which tolled the speedy trial clock and allowed the trial court to deny his motion to dismiss on those grounds. Affirmed in part.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Mayle, Filed On: January 19, 2024, Case #: 2024-Ohio-185, Categories: Drug Offender, Evidence, speedy Trial
J. Lipinsky finds the trial court erroneously granted the state's motion for a continuance in a juvenile's arson and burglary case. The juvenile court must apply the same standards as those used in adult court when considering a motion for a continuance past the speedy trial deadline. The prosecutor requested the continuance because of the alleged unavailability of witnesses during Thanksgiving week, but because she failed to include specific witnesses who would be absent or why their testimony was crucial to the state's case, the continuance should not have been granted and the juvenile's order of delinquency will be vacated. Reversed.
Court: Colorado Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lipinsky, Filed On: January 11, 2024, Case #: 2024COA4, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Juvenile Law, speedy Trial
J. Lorello finds that defendant's speedy trial rights were not violated by delays between his arrest and conviction for battery on a police officer. He contributed to the delay by asking to vacate his first trial and seeking new counsel, and further delay was due to emergency Covid-19 orders that stopped jury trials. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lorello, Filed On: January 9, 2024, Case #: 49545, Categories: Battery, 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. Mesiwala holds that the trial court must dismiss defendant's case because his right to a speedy trial was violated. The trial court failed to bring him to trial within 60 days of the date it received a remittitur from this court ordering a new trial. Vacated.
Court: California Courts Of Appeal, Judge: Mesiwala, Filed On: December 20, 2023, Case #: C098517, Categories: speedy Trial
[Consolidated.] J. Shepherd finds a lower court properly sentenced two defendants to 226 and 187 months in prison for conspiracy to distribute and possession with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin, and conspiracy to commit money laundering. The defendants argued that they are entitled to relief for violations of the Speedy Trial Act. However, the government sufficiently showed in court that the defendants are not entitled to relief under the Act based on the complexity of the charges against both men. Affirmed.
Court: 8th Circuit, Judge: Shepherd, Filed On: December 19, 2023, Case #: 22-2415, Categories: Drug Offender, speedy Trial, Money Laundering
J. Halligan finds that the lower court improperly upheld defendant's conviction for harassing his mother even though not all pertinent evidence had been turned over when the prosecution filed a certificate of compliance in discovery. State-enacted reforms more closely link discovery and trial-readiness, while belated disclosure requires dismissal on speedy-trial grounds, especially that caused by the lack of due diligence. Reversed.
Court: New York Court Of Appeals, Judge: Halligan, Filed On: December 14, 2023, Case #: 92, Categories: Criminal Procedure, speedy Trial, Discovery