State v. S. Llamas, 388 Mont. 53

Llamas was arrested May 16, 2014 for an attempted robbery with a handgun; a Justice Court complaint and bail were set and the State later filed an information in District Court charging felony robbery, drug possession, and firearm use.
She pled not guilty in District Court on July 10, 2014; an omnibus hearing and trial dates were set and repeatedly continued after counsel substitutions and defense requests for new counsel.
The District Court ultimately set an "effective" trial date of May 26, 2015; Llamas moved to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial on May 6, 2015 and the parties stipulated to decide the motion on briefs rather than hold an evidentiary hearing.
The District Court found a 375-day delay from arrest to the effective trial date, attributed most delay to institutional/state causes, assigned limited delay to Llamas, found she timely demanded a speedy trial, found pretrial incarceration but no evidentiary showing of impairment to her defense, and denied the dismissal motion.
Llamas pleaded guilty September 10, 2015 and was sentenced November 3, 2015 with credit for 526 days in custody; she appealed denial of the speedy-trial dismissal and argued ineffective assistance for counsel’s agreement to waive an evidentiary hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the District Court erred in denying dismissal for violation of the right to a speedy trial	Llamas: 375-day delay is presumptively prejudicial, mostly attributable to the State, and her pretrial incarceration was oppressive	State: Much of the delay was institutional (low-scrutiny) and some delay resulted from defendant’s counsel changes; Llamas presented no evidence of impairment to defense	Affirmed: Court found delay exceeded 200-day trigger but attributed most delay to institutional/state causes, found timely demand but no evidentiary showing of prejudice sufficient to warrant dismissal
Whether counsel was ineffective for stipulating to decide the speedy-trial motion on briefs (waiving an evidentiary hearing)	Llamas: Waiver prevented presentation of evidence on reasons for delay and prejudice; counsel’s conduct was deficient and prejudiced her	State: Record does not adequately show counsel’s motives or deficient performance on direct appeal; remedy is postconviction relief where evidentiary hearing can be held	Affirmed on speedy-trial claim; ineffective-assistance claim deferred — Court allows Llamas to pursue postconviction relief and appointment of counsel for that collateral attack; dissent would remand for an evidentiary hearing on ineffective assistance

Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (establishes four-factor speedy trial balancing test)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (framework for ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claims)
State v. Ariegwe, 338 Mont. 442 (requires factual findings on each of the four speedy-trial factors)
State v. Velasquez, 384 Mont. 447 (adopted 200-day trigger for raising speedy-trial claims)
State v. Brekke, 387 Mont. 218 (clarifies application of the 200-day trigger and presumptive prejudice)
State v. Zimmerman, 375 Mont. 374 (discusses weight of presumptive prejudice and institutional delay)
Whitlow v. State, 343 Mont. 90 (applies Strickland standard in Montana decisions)