8/23/2021

Download Free Right To A Speedy Trial Court Cases Software

53

Legal Seagull offers legal self-help educational products, including video tutorials, sample court documents, and resources for self-represented parties ('pro se' or 'pro per') - and attorneys - seeking to develop practical litigation skills, including discovery, depositions, pre-trial procedures, evidence, and trial. The court later expanded the right to an attorney to state-level misdemeanor cases that carried a substantial risk of jail time, usually at least one year. The right to an attorney, regardless of financial means, is one of the fundamental rights included in the Miranda warnings that police must read to people during or after their arrest. Oct 20, 2020 However, a motion to dismiss based upon a speedy trial right may be viewed as not an assertion to a right to a speedy trial, but rather seeking no trial. 2-01-288-CR, 2003 WL 1524138, at.4 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth Mar.

The Right to a Speedy Trial in Texas

  • United States, the U.S. Supreme Court rules that if the Sixth Amendment’s speedy trial right is violated, then the Court must dismiss the indictment against the defendant or reverse the conviction. This means that even if a defendant is guilty of the crime, a violation of the speedy trial right demands that he or she be set free.
  • FREE Motion For Speedy Trial - District Court Of Delaware. Assistant United States Attorney for the District of Delaware. Time under the Speedy Trial Act for the reasons set. S Unopposed Motion to Exclude Time Under the Speedy Trial Act. For a trial outweighs the public and defendant’s interest in a speedy trial.

The government — not the defendant — bears the burden of bringing cases to trial, but how long must a defendant wait for his or her day in court? The answer is not clear cut. So, what is the right to a speedy trial?

What is the Right to a Speedy Trial?

Under the federal constitution and the Texas constitution, the accused in a criminal prosecution is guaranteed the right to a speedy trial. But neither source, nor Texas law, defines “speedy.” That means once a person is accused — either by being arrested or charged — he or she could wait months or even years before being brought to trial. During this waiting game, evidence may get lost and witnesses may disappear, resulting in a weakened defense for the defendant.

The Remedy: Dismissal

The “silver lining” of this game is that the defendant’s charges may be fully dismissed if the court finds the accused was deprived of his or her right to a speedy trial. However, since the sole remedy is a dismissal, courts are hesitant in finding a deprivation of the right to a speedy trial. This means defendants may bear a heavy burden when claiming they have been denied their constitutional right to a speedy trial in Texas.

When Has the Right to a Speedy Trial been Violated?

A defendant’s right to a speedy trial is violated when there has been an unjustified delay between the accusation and trial which results in prejudice to the accused. First, there must exist a delay that is “presumptively prejudicial.” Then, the court will assess whether there has been a deprivation of the speedy trial right. To do so, Texas courts use a balancing test established by the Supreme Court in Barker v. Wingo.

What is the “Presumptively Prejudicial” Delay?

In assessing whether a defendant has been deprived of his speedy trial right, there must first exist a delay that is “presumptively prejudicial.” There is no set time frame that triggers the presumption, but a delay approaching one year is sufficient to trigger a speedy trial inquiry. Orand v. State, 254 S.W.3d 560 (Tex. App. Fort Worth 2008). Once it has been determined there is a presumptively prejudicial delay, the court will use the Barker Balancing Test to assess whether the defendant was deprived of his speedy trial right, and thus entitled to a dismissal.

The Barker Balancing Test

Under the Barker balancing test, there are four factors that the court assesses:

  1. Whether the length of the delay was uncommonly long;
  2. Whether the reason for the delay was justified;
  3. Whether the accused asserted his right; and
  4. Whether the delay resulted in prejudice to the accused.

Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972).

Of the four factors, the state bears the burden with regards to the first two factors and the defendant bears the burden of proving the other two factors. The court will evaluate the factors, separately and together, to determine whether they weigh in favor of the state or the defendant. If a majority of the factors weigh in favor of the defendant, the court may find that his right has been violated and his charges may be dismissed.

Defendant’s Burden: Assertion of the Right & Prejudice to His Case

To claim a deprivation of a speedy trial right, the defendant must have asserted his right to a speedy trial. A failure to assert the right may be viewed as the defendant not having the desire for a speedy trial, but rather no trial. Cantu v. State, 253 S.W.3d 273, 283 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008). Furthermore, the court may construe a failure to assert the right as an indication that the defendant suffered no prejudice from the delay. Dragoo v. State, 96 S.W.3d 308, 314 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). The defendant may assert the right by clear and unambiguous communications to the court or prosecution seeking a speedy trial. However, a motion to dismiss based upon a speedy trial right may be viewed as not an assertion to a right to a speedy trial, but rather seeking no trial. Adkins v. State, No. 2-01-288-CR, 2003 WL 1524138, at *4 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth Mar. 24, 2003, pet. ref’d).

State’s Burden: Length of the Delay & Reason for the Delay

There is no particular length in delay that constitutes a violation of the right to a speedy trial. Furthermore, portions of the delay may be attributed to the defendant, thus weighing against him. Kelly v. State, 163 S.W.3d 722 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). However, when there is a deliberate attempt to delay trial to hamper the defense, this factor would weigh heavily against the state. Starks v. State, 266 S.W.3d 605 (Tex. App. El Paso 2008). Common neutral events— such as overcrowded dockets — weigh less heavily against the state. Zamorano v. State, 84 S.W.3d 643 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).

Conclusion

Though courts are reluctant to find a defendant has been deprived of this constitutional right, and a defendant may bear the bulk of the burden, it is not impossible. The key to raising this claim lies in properly asserting the right to a speedy trial in Texas. It should be asserted timely and frequently in the appropriate manner as to notify the court and prosecution of the accused’s desire for a speedy trial. A slight misstep may result in the court finding that the right was never asserted.

Right to a Speedy Trial was not Denied

Download free right to a speedy trial court cases software download
Harris v. State, 827 S.W.2d 949 (Tex, Crim. App. 1992).Capital Murder13 months
State v. Greenlee, 2007 WL 2460045 (Tex. App. Tyler Aug. 31, 2007, pet refÕd).Misdemeanor possession13 months
Deeb v. State, 815 S.W.2d 692 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)Conspiracy to commit capital murder15 months
Kelly v. State, 163 S.W.3d 722 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005)Simple drug possession17 months
Bryan v. State, 2007 WL 1133216 (Tex. App. San Antonio Apr. 18, 2007, no pet.)Possession of drug paraphernalia18 months
Webb v. State, 36 S.W.3d 164 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet refÕd)Aggravated sexual assault20 months
Mendez v. State, 212 S.W.3d 382 (Tex. App. Austin 2006, pet. ref'd)Aggravated assault23 months
Ortega v. State, 2015 WL 4594113 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] July 30, 2015)Possession of gambling deviceMore than 27 months
Massey v. State, 2004 WL 2307418 (Tx. App. Houston [1st Dist.] Oct. 14, 2004, no pet.)Aggravated robbery28 months
Phillips v. State, 2004 WL 299279 (Tex. App. Texarkana Feb. 18, 2004, no pet.)Assault (of corrections officer)28 months
Adkins v. State, 2003 WL 1524138 (Tex. App. Fort Worth Mar. 24, 2003, pet. ref'd)Possession with intent to deliver32 months
State v. Smith, 76 S.W.3d 541 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, pet. ref'd)Burglary and attempted aggravated assaultOver 3 years
Harlan v. State, 975 S.W.2d 387 (Tex. App. Tyler 1998, pet. ref'd)DWI4 years and 5 months
Ex parte Beech, 591 S.W.2d 502 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979)Speeding8 years

Right to a Speedy Trial was Denied

Gonzales v. State, 435 S.W.3d 801 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014).Injury to child and indecency with child6 years
State v. Wei, 447 S.W.3d 549, 554 (Tex. App.ÑHouston [14th Dist.] 2014).DWI4 years and 3 months
Zamorano v. State, 84 S.W.3d 643 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002).DWI4 years
Chapman v. Evans, 744 S.W.2d 133 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).Delivery of controlled substance2 years and 6 months
Turner v. State, 545 S.W.2d 133 (Tex Crim. App. 1976).Felony Theft2 years and 3 months

Thank you for signing up for a free trial of Speedy Claims, the industry leader in fast, easy medical billing. Download from the links below. Once your download is complete, click on the file and follow the instructions to install — it should only take a minute or two.

Trial

If you need help or just want to learn everything Speedy Claims can do, we’d love to provide a free personal demo! Email us at [email protected] , or call 844-CMS-1500 to get started.

Download Free Right To A Speedy Trial Court Cases Software Free

The Free Trial is a fully functioning download of our SpeedySoft solutions. For 30 days, you will be able to experience just how easy and powerful our software is in helping you run your practice. Our industry-leading customer support team is available to you and there is no obligation to purchase the software at the end of the trial period. We are confident that once presented with our solutions we will be your only source for your insurance billing software. Please select from the links below.

Use the trial to create and send actual claims. There are no limitations other than the 30 days. If you sign up your claims and data will still be in the software for you.

Download Free Right To A Speedy Trial Court Cases Software Development

Supported operating systems: Windows Vista, Win 7, 8, 8.1, and Win 10 (Can be used on MAC with installation of either Parallels or VMWare Fusion add-ons or by using the cloud version) Beyblade rip itbeyblade battles wiki.

Hardware requirements: 256MB RAM, 100MB disk space, screen resolution of 800x600 or higher