Habeas Corpus – Speedy trials

Listen to this article

It was not error for state courts to conclude that a defendant was not prejudiced by a 14-month delay in going to trial.

“[T]he record contains ample evidence supporting the state court’s ultimate conclusion that West was not prejudiced by the delay here. Robinson did not die anywhere close to the
‘presumptively prejudicial’ 12-month mark; rather, he passed away six months after the State filed its complaint. Had the trial started shortly thereafter, West would have been hard pressed
to bring a successful speedy trial claim, because he would have been almost six months short of the 12-month Barker trigger. Barker, 407 U.S. at 532. Indeed, at the time West started
complaining about his speedy trial rights, the remedy would not have been dismissal of the charges; it would have been the prompt scheduling of the trial. When one also considers the
strength of the evidence the State presented to show that West was indeed at the fair and with the victim, we cannot find that the state court’s conclusion on prejudice was unreasonable.”

Affirmed.

11-1172 West v. Symdon

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Callahan, J., Wood, J.
Full Text