Domestic Abuse (DANCO)

Whether because of COVID measures, defendant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated?    

Defendant was convicted of felony violation of a Domestic Abuse No Contact Order (DANCO).  He appealed.  On appeal, he argued that his conviction needed to be reversed on the grounds that his jury trial did not commence until 77 days after he demanded a speedy trial, in violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that in the context of a speedy trial analysis, neither the State nor the defendant are responsible for the delay in bringing a defendant to trial when that delay is solely due to public safety concerns related to COVID.  Herein, there was no constitutional violation because  the trial court delayed commencing trial solely because of the COVID pandemic, the order of the Minnesota Supreme Court prohibiting jury trials, and the conclusion that jury trials could not be conducted safely at an earlier date.  Affirmed.

State v. Jackson, A21-0126, Washington County.

Minneapolis Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

By |2021-12-09T22:13:51+00:00December 9th, 2021|Victories/Case Law Updates|0 Comments

About the Author:

Leave A Comment