Boucher v. State
2011 WY 2
| Wyo. | 2011Background
- Appellant was charged in 2001 with ten counts of second-degree sexual assault; an arrest warrant issued the same day.
- Appellant moved to Arizona; arrested in 2008 on the warrant; original charges were dismissed without prejudice.
- New information in 2008-2009 charged five counts of second-degree and one of third-degree sexual assault with corrected dates; trial set for 2009.
- Appellant moved to dismiss, claiming violation of speedy-trial rights; district court denied the motion and trial proceeded.
- Appellant was convicted on all six counts and sentenced to 30 to 60 years; appeal followed raising speedy-trial, prosecutorial misconduct, and evidence-admission claims.
- Court held the speedy-trial claim failed and rejected the other asserted errors, affirming the conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Speedy-trial violation under Barker/Wyo rule | Boucher: delay from arrest to trial violated speedy-trial rights | State: delays were reasonable; postponement to correct dates and gather evidence justifies it | No speedy-trial violation |
| Prosecutorial misconduct requiring reversal | Boucher: multiple voir dire and cross-examination incidents prejudiced trial | State: conduct was either permissible cross-examination or harmless, with arguments lacking prejudice | No reversible prosecutorial misconduct |
| Mistrial denial after redacted videotape | Redaction of ongoing videotape content warranted mistrial | District court abused discretion by denying mistrial; content was prejudicial and improperly admitted | No abuse of discretion; denial affirmed |
| Admission of 'flight evidence' | Flight evidence showed conscious guilt and should be excluded | Flight evidence properly admissible; jury may infer purpose of flight | Admissible flight evidence not error |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (four Barker factors govern speedy-trial analysis)
- United States v. Marion, 404 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1971) (speedy-trial clock starts at arrest or indictment)
- Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (U.S. 1992) (appeals for delay must show prejudice in prolonged delay)
- Berry v. State, 93 P.3d 222 (Wy. 2004) (weight of prejudice and pretrial incarceration factor in speedy-trial analysis)