Willamette Law Online

Oregon Court of Appeals


ListPreviousNext


State v. Baranovich

Summarized by: 

Date Filed: 12-12-2012
Case #: A145579
Sercombe, P.J. for the Court; Brewer, J.; and Ortega, J.
Full Text Opinion: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/A145579.pdf

Criminal Procedure: 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.