15 results for 'cat:"Drug Offender" AND cat:"Speedy Trial"'.
J. Doyle finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion for a new trial on his convictions for methamphetamine trafficking, fleeing or attempting to elude police, failure to maintain lane and abandonment of drugs in a public place. The trial court correctly denied defendant's pre-trial motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds. Defendant was indicted in August 2021, filed his speedy trial demand in October 2021 and was tried in March 2022. The speedy trial deadline was tolled due to the judicial emergency declared during the Covid-19 pandemic. Defendant's indictment in a separate county and his speedy trial demand in that county both occurred during the emergency tolling period and the charges were dropped after the instant convictions. Affirmed.
Court: Georgia Court of Appeals, Judge: Doyle, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: A24A0438, Categories: drug Offender, speedy Trial
J. Riedmann finds the district court properly convicted defendant for simultaneous firearm and drug possession. Drug task force officers discovered the items in defendant's apartment during a warranted search. Defendant sought to challenge the conviction on speedy trial grounds, though she has acknowledged the continuance time period was properly excluded. Her claims of ineffective assistance based on her counsel's having caused that error are without merit. Affirmed.
Court: Nebraska Court Of Appeals, Judge: Riedmann , Filed On: April 2, 2024, Case #: A-23-475, Categories: drug Offender, Firearms, speedy Trial
J. Gratton finds that the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress drug evidence as untimely. Neither a change in law regarding drug dog alerts nor a change in counsel constituted excusable neglect that would allow a late motion. Her speedy trial claim failed because most of the delay was caused by the emergency suspension of jury trials due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Affirmed.
Court: Idaho Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gratton, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 50179, Categories: drug Offender, Search, speedy Trial
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. 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
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. 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
[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. Hudson denies the juvenile offender’s petition for writ of certiorari or prohibition requesting relief after the circuit court denied his motions to dismiss the robbery, theft, drug possession and fleeing charges against him. The original charges were dismissed due to the state’s lack of readiness, but petitioner was arrested later on charges arising from the same conduct alleged in the dismissed juvenile-delinquency petition. Because there was no contemporaneous objection, the court did not commit an abuse of discretion by denying the motion to dismiss based on a speedy-trial violation. Petitioner did not argue that the time period between the filing of the first criminal information and his second arrest was not properly excluded from the speedy-trial calculation. His challenge to this particular period of time was not ruled on and is not preserved for review. Denied.
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: CR-22-677, Categories: drug Offender, Theft, speedy Trial
J. Connors finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of aggravated trafficking of scheduled drugs and unlawful trafficking in scheduled drugs. Defendant contends that his speedy trial rights were violated. However, his claim under the Maine Constitution cannot succeed, because he failed to "adequately assert his right." Also, his federal speedy trial right claim fails under obvious error review. Affirmed.
Court: Maine Supreme Court, Judge: Connors, Filed On: August 31, 2023, Case #: 2023ME60, Categories: drug Offender, speedy Trial
J. Gunter finds that the lower court properly convicted defendant of conspiracy to distribute meth after his trial for crimes committed in 2019 was delayed until 2021. The delays in defendant's case were primarily due to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic and the unexpected death of his counsel, neither of which unfairly prejudiced his defense. Affirmed.
Court: 7th Circuit, Judge: Rovner, Filed On: August 11, 2023, Case #: 22-1546, Categories: drug Offender, speedy Trial
J. Baker finds that the trial court properly dismissed defendant's speedy trial motion and convicted him for drug distribution. The state failed to show a valid reason for the more than three-year delay and he did not waive his right to a speedy trial, but he was not prejudiced since his pretrial incarceration was not oppressive and he failed to show that pending charges in Montana increased the anxiety he felt while jailed in Idaho. Affirmed.
Court: Montana Supreme Court, Judge: Baker, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: DA 21-0624, Categories: drug Offender, speedy Trial
J. Wells finds that the lower court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss the charges of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamines against her. While she awaited a hearing in Maryland, she was arrested and incarcerated for separate crimes in West Virginia. After serving her sentence, she filed the dismissal, arguing Maryland failed to comply with an Interstate Agreement on Detainers. However, because she herself did not file any written notice for final disposition, she cannot benefit from the IAD statute of being brought to trial within 180 days. Affirmed.
Court: The Appellate Court of Maryland, Judge: Wells, Filed On: July 25, 2023, Case #: C-11-CR-20-000080, Categories: drug Offender, Intent, speedy Trial
J. Lewis finds the trial court properly denied defendant's motion to dismiss on speedy trial grounds during defendant's trial for trafficking in persons, and drug and weapons charges. Although the court took several months to make a decision on his motion to suppress, the length of time was not unreasonable and did not count against his speedy trial clock. Defendant was charged with various felonies and misdemeanors in a complex case and filed several extension of time motions during the court's analysis of his suppression motion, all of which rendered the span of time reasonable and properly tolled his speedy trial clock. Affirmed.
Court: Ohio Court Of Appeals, Judge: Lewis, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: 2023-Ohio-2079, Categories: drug Offender, speedy Trial, Human Trafficking