People v. Galloway
2014 IL App (1st) 123004
Ill. App. Ct.2014Background
- In Aug 2010 defendant Doris Galloway was charged after a Feb 2010 traffic accident; she filed a written speedy-trial demand on Sept 28, 2010.
- Several continuances followed; defendant failed to appear on Jan 26, 2011, prompting bond forfeiture and a warrant; she appeared March 8, 2011, and renewed a speedy-trial demand.
- Trial was set for Sept 20, 2011 at 9:00 a.m.; defendant was absent when the case was called multiple times, a bond forfeiture and warrant issued, but she arrived later that afternoon and the warrant was vacated.
- Defendant moved to dismiss on March 27, 2012, claiming the State exceeded the 160-day speedy-trial period; the trial court denied the motion, finding her Sept 20 absence waived her prior speedy demand.
- After a bench trial (May 7, 2012) she was convicted of driving with a suspended license, failure to give information, and driving left of center; sentenced to concurrent SWAP terms and supervision/fine.
- On appeal she argued (1) mere lateness on Sept 20 did not waive her speedy trial demand and (2) counsel was ineffective for failing to file an earlier dismissal motion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether defendant’s lateness on the scheduled trial date constituted a "failure to appear" that waived her prior written speedy-trial demand | State: failure to appear for the court date set by the court (date and time) waived the demand | Galloway: arriving later the same business day is not a failure to appear; "court date" should be read to mean any appearance during court hours | Court: "court date set by the court" includes the time; her absence when bond forfeiture issued waived the prior speedy demand |
| Whether counsel was ineffective for not filing a speedy-trial dismissal in May 2011 | State: any motion would have been futile because defendant had waived the earlier demand by failing to appear on Jan 26, 2011 and a new demand began March 8, 2011 | Galloway: Jan 26 absence did not waive demand because the case was not set for trial and earlier continuances tolled the clock | Court: counsel performance not prejudicial — no lawful speedy-trial claim existed, so failure to move was not ineffective assistance |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Cordell, 223 Ill. 2d 380 (statutory and constitutional speedy-trial rights govern analysis)
- People v. Zakarauskas, 398 Ill. App. 3d 451 (defendant’s failure to appear waives prior speedy-trial demand)
- People v. Minor, 2011 IL App (1st) 101097 (same conclusion applying 2000 amendment: failure to appear restarts demand)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel)