Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Gottschalk

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided July 7, 2006No. A-8798Published

1ConcurrenceMannheimer, Judge

I agree with my colleagues that Criminal Rule 45 was not violated in this case. I further agree that the facts of this case demonstrate that there is a problem with the way that Rule 45(c)(1) defines the starting date for the speedy trial clock.

*1173 Background of the provision at issue in this case

Criminal Rule 45 specifies the time limit for bringing a defendant to trial. Prior to 1993, the starting date for calculating Rule 45 was “the date [on which] the defendant [was] arrested [or] initially arraigned, or ... the date [on which] the charging document was] served upon the defendant, whichever…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Drahosh v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Lindsay v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1985
  3. State, Department of Corrections v. Kila, Inc.Alaska Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Cannizzaro v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1988
  5. In re HernandezDistrict Court, D. Alaska · 1915

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API