Carr v. District Court in & for Eighth Judicial Dist.
Supreme Court of Colorado
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Hodges
Because the above captioned cases involve similar facts and the same issue, they have been consolidated in this court. Pursuant to C.A.R. 21, petitioners sought relief in the nature of prohibition or mandamus to compel respondent district court to dismiss the criminal charges against them on the ground that they were denied a speedy trial. We issued a rule in each case requiring the respondents to show cause why such relief should not be granted. Responses and briefs have now been filed.
We hold that chronic trial congestion does not excuse the respondents’ failure to bring these petitioners…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Casias v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1966
- United States v. RodriguezCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
- State v. ThomasSupreme Court of Iowa · 1974
- People v. YniquezAppellate Division of the Superior Court of California · 1974
- Caine v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by30 opinions
- State v. FrazierCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1984
- Harrington v. DIST. CT. IN AND FOR COUNTY OF MORGANSupreme Court of Colorado · 1977
- People v. BellSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
- People v. AndersonColorado Court of Appeals · 1982
- People v. DeasonSupreme Court of Colorado · 1983
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.