343 P.3d 801
Wyo.2015Background
- Turner was serving a Wyoming sentence (Albany County) and was transferred to a Laramie County community corrections facility; he absconded on April 6, 2012 and was later charged in Laramie County with escape.
- Texas authorities detained Turner in Travis County in late 2012; he signed a waiver of extradition on December 28, 2012 and was returned to Wyoming custody January 17, 2013.
- Turner filed a pro se motion to dismiss on August 7, 2013 claiming a speedy-trial violation and later, through counsel, moved to dismiss under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) alleging Article III (180-day) or Article IV (120-day) deadlines were breached.
- The State argued no IAD demand/detainer was ever filed by Wyoming prosecutors; the district court denied dismissal, treating Turner’s August 7 pro se motion (filed after return to Wyoming) as a request for final disposition.
- Turner entered a conditional guilty plea preserving appellate review of the denial of his motion to dismiss; he appealed arguing the IAD’s speedy-trial provisions required dismissal.
- The Supreme Court affirmed, holding the IAD did not apply because no detainer was lodged and Turner made no timely request for final disposition while in the sending state.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the IAD’s speedy-trial deadlines require dismissal of the escape charge? | Turner: He either sought final disposition under Article III (180 days) by his extradition waiver/requests, or Wyoming invoked Article IV (120 days) and missed statutory deadlines. | State: No detainer or IAD demand was ever lodged by Wyoming; Turner’s extradition waiver and post-return filings do not satisfy IAD notice/ demand requirements. | Court: IAD inapplicable—no detainer was lodged and Turner made no timely Article III/IV request while in the sending state; dismissal not required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Short v. State, 205 P.3d 195 (Wyo. 2009) (IAD does not apply where no detainer is lodged)
- Layton v. State, 150 P.3d 173 (Wyo. 2007) (defining detainer requirement under IAD)
- Odhinn v. State, 82 P.3d 715 (Wyo. 2003) (discussing prosecutor-initiated detainer practice)
- Carchman v. Nash, 473 U.S. 716 (U.S. 1985) (detainer defined as notification to the institution advising the prisoner is wanted elsewhere)
- Cuyler v. Adams, 449 U.S. 433 (U.S. 1981) (Article III 180-day trial requirement under federal construction of IAD)
- State v. Springer, 406 S.W.3d 526 (Tenn. 2013) (notice/certification requirement is necessary to invoke Article III)