State v. Baranovich

Summarized by:

  • Court: Oregon Court of Appeals
  • Area(s) of Law: Criminal Procedure
  • Date Filed: 12-12-2012
  • Case #: A145579
  • Judge(s)/Court Below: Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Brewer, J.; and Ortega, J.
  • Full Text Opinion

An incarcerated defendant consents to a delay of trial for other charges when she knowingly fails to make a demand for a speedy trial.

Defendant appealed a conviction of theft on statutory speedy trial grounds under ORS 135.474. Defendant's trial was held 17 months after she was charged, during 10 of which she was incarcerated for a different offense. Defendant argued that this delay was unreasonable. The State responded that Defendant impliedly consented to most of the delay because she failed to appear at a pretrial conference and because of her knowingly late filing of her speedy trial demand. Defendant argued that her consent to delay must be explicit. State v. Bircher held that a prosecution delay is caused by an incarcerated defendant when the defendant knowingly fails to demand a speedy trial. The Court of Appeals held that Defendant consented to the delay because she knew of her ability to demand a speedy trial and failed to do so within a reasonable period of time, and the other delay attributable to the State was reasonable. Affirmed.

Advanced Search