Speedy trial procedure

Rule Our courts have held that the time period within which a defendant must be brought to trial upon appeal of a misdemeanor conviction to circuit court begins to run under Rule McBride v. State, Ark. State, 18 Ark. The primary burden is on the court and prosecutor to assure that a case is brought to trial in a timely fashion.

Glover v. State, 35 Ark. A defendant has no duty to bring himself to trial, Glover v. State, supra, and the time for trial commences running without demand by the defendant, Ark. Once it has been shown that a trial is to be held after the speedy-trial period has expired, the State has the burden of showing that any delay was the result of the defendant's conduct or that it was otherwise legally justified.

Raglin v. State, supra; Reed v. State, supra. Here, appellant perfected his appeal to circuit court on May 31, , but his trial was not held until some three years and seven months later, on December 30, Therefore, the burden was on the State to show that at least two years and seven months of the delay was excludable. The State failed to meet that burden. We need not decide in this case whether appellant was required to notify the city attorney of his appeal in order to start the running of the speedy-trial period.

This is true because, even if we were to assume that appellant did have some such burden, the city attorney was clearly aware of the appeal no later than June 30, , yet appellant's trial still was not held until two years and six months later.

Of that thirty-month period, the record indicates only that the period from June 30 to August 7, , was excludable and attributable to appellant.

There appears in the record no reason why appellant's trial could not have been held within twelve months of August 7, Therefore, we hold that the trial court erred in denying appellant's December motion to dismiss.

Reversed and dismissed. Griffen and Mayfield, JJ. Justia Legal Resources. Find a Lawyer. Law Students. US Federal Law. A violation of the speedy trial rule means that any conviction and sentence must be wiped out, and the charges must be dismissed if the case has not reached trial.

The federal Speedy Trial Act provides some instruction for federal cases. For example, it requires formal charges to be brought within 30 days of an arrest. One of the main reasons for the right to a speedy trial is to prevent a defendant from being held in custody for a long time, only to eventually be found innocent.

If the defendant is denied bail or cannot pay the bail amount, they will remain in jail until their trial date. An innocent citizen should not be required to spend many months incarcerated. Also, the right to a speedy trial reduces the stress on defendants and allows the defense to gather and present evidence while it is still fresh. A witness may struggle to recall the events leading to the charges if several months or more pass before the trial.

If no law sets a specific benchmark, a court must consider several factors in deciding whether the defendant was denied a speedy trial. If the delay did not undermine the defense, a judge may be inclined to give the prosecution some breathing room. The defendant will be more likely to get a case dismissed on this basis if they promptly asserted the right.

The clock usually starts running on the right to a speedy trial when the defendant is arrested. Or it may start running when the defendant is formally charged, if this happens before the arrest. However, the clock will not start running if law enforcement is investigating someone as a suspect but has not arrested or formally charged them.

Since the clock can start running before the arrest, a defendant might think that avoiding an arrest would be a good strategy if they have already been charged. However, a judge will pause the clock during any period in which the defendant is evading law enforcement. Technically, the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial does not require a defendant to be sentenced within a certain time after a conviction. Federal and state laws often provide certain time limits for sentencing, though, and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provide that a defendant is entitled to be sentenced without an unnecessary delay.

There also may be due process arguments if a delay in sentencing is extreme. Death penalty cases, which involve a separate sentencing phase, may present distinctive timing issues. Last reviewed October Criminal Law Contents. Criminal Law. Aggravating and Mitigating Factors in Criminal Sentencing.

Restitution for Crime Victims. Receiving Immunity for Testimony in a Criminal Case. Classification of Criminal Offenses.

Admissibility of Evidence in Criminal Cases. Criminal Appeals. Motions for a New Trial in Criminal Cases. Competency to Stand Trial for Criminal Defendants.