Goffaux v. State
313 Ga. App. 428
| Ga. Ct. App. | 2011Background
- Goffaux arrested August 2, 2007 on child molestation charge and released on bond August 3.
- Indicted on February 4, 2011 for one count of child molestation.
- Plead not guilty March 25, 2011; obtained counsel March 30, 2011.
- Moved to dismiss indictment for lack of speedy trial April 15, 2011; motion denied July 20, 2011.
- Appeal challenged the trial court’s Barker balancing of the speedy-trial claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the pretrial delay was presumptively prejudicial | Goffaux argues 48-month delay presumptively prejudicial. | State contends threshold prejudice exists but analyzes Barker factors thereafter. | Yes; delay crossed presumptive-prejudice threshold requiring Barker analysis. |
| Barker factor three: defendant's assertion of the right | Goffaux asserted the right in due course (and earlier when on bond/unrepresented). | Trial court weighed late assertion against Goffaux due to late filing and no statutory demand. | Trial court erred by undervaluing timely assertion; the circumstances required mitigating weight. |
| Barker factor four: prejudice from the delay | Delay impaired defense through memory decay and unavailable witnesses. | No specific proof of prejudice; only generalized claims. | Trial court failed to consider presumptive prejudice as part of the overall mix. |
| Overall Barker balancing | Legal errors in factors three and four control the outcome. | Trial court’s discretion should stand absent clear abuse. | Because of legal errors, the court vacated and remanded for proper Barker analysis. |
Key Cases Cited
- Doggett v. United States, 505 U.S. 647 (U.S. 1992) (presumptive prejudice when delay is long; use Barker factors)
- Scandrett v. State, 279 Ga. 632 (Ga. 2005) (threshold presumptive prejudice standard in Georgia)
- Ruffin v. State, 284 Ga. 52 (Ga. 2008) (Barker factor framework guidance)
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. 1972) (four-factor balancing test for speedy-trial claims)
- Giddens v. State, 280 Ga. App. 586 (Ga. App. 2006) (presumptive prejudice and delay impact on defense)
- Boseman v. State, 263 Ga. 730 (Ga. 1994) (delay’s prejudice analysis in Barker framework)
- Pickett v. State, 288 Ga. 674 (Ga. 2011) (mitigation of weight for late assertion when on bond/out counsel)
- Gleaton v. State, 288 Ga. 373 (Ga. 2010) (timing of constitutional right assertion; impact on Barker factor three)
- Porter v. State, 288 Ga. 524 (Ga. 2011) (timing of speedy-trial demands; considerations for due course)
- Fallen v. State, 289 Ga. 247 (Ga. 2011) (review of Barker factor-based prejudice and deference standards)
- Williams v. State, 277 Ga. 598 (Ga. 2004) (deference to trial court findings; abuse-of-discretion standard)