136 So. 3d 267
La. Ct. App.2014Background
- State appeals trial court's grant of motion to quash the bill of information against Corey Quinn for speedy-trial violation.
- Quinn was charged November 17, 2009 with attempted second-degree murder (case 492-310 “C”).
- Charges were reinstated under subsequent dockets after nol pros occurred (502-583 “C” and 507-507 “C”).
- State repeatedly dismissed and reinstituted charges due to unavailability of the victim/witness, Damian Jackson.
- Quinn remained incarcerated; trial court granted the motion to quash on September 2, 2011; record contains no underlying crime details.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the trial court's quash appropriate under speedy-trial analysis? | State argued delay was justified and not prejudicial. | Quinn argued the State flaunted authority by repeat nol pros/ reinstitution to prolong incarceration. | Yes, trial court abused discretion; quash affirmed. |
| Did the State’s repeated nol pros and reinstitution constitute a speed-trial violation? | State claimed delays within Barker factors and statutory limits. | Quinn contended repeated reinstitution violated speedy-trial rights. | No, court found no speedy-trial prejudice; not a violation under Barker framework. |
Key Cases Cited
- Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (U.S. Supreme Court 1972) (establishes Barker four-factor test for speedy-trial claims)
- Batiste, 939 So.2d 1245 (La. 2006) (recognizes State's authority to nol-pros and reinstitute but limits when prejudice shown or malfeasance exists)
- Love, 847 So.2d 1198 (La. 2003) (analyzes prejudice factors and encumbers speedy-trial analysis in Louisiana context)
- DeRouen, 678 So.2d 39 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1996) (delay as trigger for Barker analysis and case-specific balancing)
- Lee, 80 So.3d 1292 (La. App. 4th Cir. 2012) (focuses on prejudice showing in Barker analysis)
- State v. King, 60 So.3d 615 (La. 2011) (discusses speedy-trial rights and related remedies in Louisiana)