CASE LAW UPDATE: Whether defendant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated?
Defendant was convicted of domestic assault and disorderly conduct. Defendant appealed, arguing that his right to a speedy trial was violated. The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that defendant’s right to a speedy trial was not violated because: (1) the trial only exceeded the speedy trial window by 30 days; (2) the defendant’s single demand for a speedy trial followed the defendant causing a total delay of more than 180 days between charging and the first scheduled trial date; (3) neither the State nor the court were to blame for the delay; (4) the defendant had previously waived his right to a speedy trial; and (5) the defendant suffered no prejudice as a result. Affirmed.
State v. Wyatt, A19-1465, Dakota County.
Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.