State v. Benner

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 10-24-2012
  • Case #: A145265
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Duncan, J. for the Court; Armstrong, J.; and Haselton, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

There must be sufficient evidence to establish if a defendant or his counsel intentionally waived the right to a 90-day speedy trial.

Defendant appealed his driving while revoked conviction, claiming that the trial court erred in concluding the Defendant had waived his right to a speedy trial. Defendant was indicted by a Grand Jury on July 20, 2007 for driving with a revoked license. In December 2009, the Defendant sent a request for a speedy trial that was received by the District Attorney on December 3, 2009. The State and the defense counsel communicated through email to set the trial date and because of a continuation, the trial date was set beyond the 90-day period. The trial court denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss the indictment claiming the Defendant had waived the right to a speedy trial because he was silent when the trial date was mentioned. The Court of Appeals held that there was not enough evidence on the record to show that Defendant had waived his right on his own or through his defense counsel. Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment of dismissal.

Advanced Search