State v. Johnson
| Court | Alabama Court of Criminal Appeals |
| Writing for the Court | BASCHAB. |
| Citation | 900 So.2d 482 |
| Parties | STATE of Alabama v. Romekia Lashon JOHNSON. |
| Decision Date | 29 October 2004 |
900 So.2d 482
STATE of Alabamav.
Romekia Lashon JOHNSON
CR-03-1221.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.
October 29, 2004.
G. Hal Walker, Montgomery, for appellee.
BASCHAB, Judge.
The State appeals from the trial court's order granting a motion to dismiss the case against the appellee, Romekia Lashon Johnson.
The State argues that the trial court erroneously granted the appellee's "Motion to Dismiss for Violation of Defendant's Right to a Speedy Trial." Specifically, it contends that the appellee was not denied his right to a speedy trial and that the trial court erroneously granted the motion without first considering the factors set forth in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). In Barker, the United States Supreme Court set forth the following factors that must be weighed when reviewing a speedy-trial claim: (1) the length of the delay; (2) the reason for the delay; (3) the accused's assertion of his right to a speedy trial; and (4) the degree of prejudice the accused suffered due to the delay. See also Ex parte Carrell, 565 So.2d 104 (Ala.1990). Unless the delay is sufficiently lengthy to be presumptively prejudicial, it is not necessary to consider the remaining Barker factors. See Barker, supra; Zumbado v. State, 615 So.2d 1223 (Ala.Crim.App.1993). The pertinent dates and events were as follows:
November 29, 2001: The appellee was arrested and subsequently released on bond.
February 7, 2003: The appellee was indicted for unlawful possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) and first-degree unlawful possession of marijuana.
March 20, 2003: The appellee filed a motion for discovery and a motion for extraordinary expenses.
April 18, 2003: The State filed a "Notice of Discovery to Defendant, Intent to Use Prior Convictions, Intent to Invoke Sentencing Enhancements, Intent to Offer Proof by a Certificate of Analysis, and Motion for Discovery by State."
February 4, 2004: The appellee filed a "Motion to Dismiss for Violation of Defendant's Right to a Speedy Trial."
April 14, 2004: The trial court conducted a hearing on the appellee's motion to dismiss.
A. LENGTH OF THE DELAY
To determine the length of the delay, time is measured either from the date of the formal indictment or from the date of arrest, whichever occurred first.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sharifi v. State, CR-04-1185.
...prejudicial); Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31-month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App. 2004) (28-month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25-month delay w......
-
Graham v. State, CR-15-0201
...Vincent v. State, 607 So. 2d 1290 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992) (31-month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So. 2d 482 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004) (28-month delay not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So. 2d 440 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995) (25-month delay was not ......
-
Ware v. State, CR–08–1177.
...181 So.3d 404Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31–month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App.2004) (28–month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25–month delay was......
-
Bailey v. State , CR–07–1673.
...prejudicial); Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31–month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App.2004) (28–month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25–month delay wa......
-
Sharifi v. State, CR-04-1185.
...prejudicial); Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31-month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App. 2004) (28-month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25-month delay w......
-
Ware v. State, CR–08–1177.
...181 So.3d 404Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31–month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App.2004) (28–month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25–month delay was......
-
Graham v. State, CR-15-0201
...Vincent v. State, 607 So. 2d 1290 (Ala. Crim. App. 1992) (31-month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So. 2d 482 (Ala. Crim. App. 2004) (28-month delay not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So. 2d 440 (Ala. Crim. App. 1995) (25-month delay was not ......
-
Bailey v. State , CR–07–1673.
...prejudicial); Vincent v. State, 607 So.2d 1290 (Ala.Crim.App.1992) (31–month delay was presumptively prejudicial). Cf. State v. Johnson, 900 So.2d 482 (Ala.Crim.App.2004) (28–month delay was not presumptively prejudicial); Payne v. State, 683 So.2d 440 (Ala.Crim.App.1995) (25–month delay wa......