State v. Lackey
Court of Appeals of Washington
1Opinion of the Court
¶1 Daniel Lackey appeals his conviction for delivery of a controlled substance. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for violation of his CrR 3.3 speedy trial rights. Washington’s speedy trial rule requires that a defendant be brought to trial within 90 days of arraignment if he is not confined in jail. Here, the defendant was tried 323 days after he was arraigned. Some of the delays were chargeable to the defendant, some to the State; many were the result of what we conclude was routine court congestion. But due to Washington’s vacuous speedy trial rule, CrR…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Doggett v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Vermont v. BrillonSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State Of Washington v. Joseph Martin, Jr.Court of Appeals of Washington · 2013
- State Of Washington v. Michael JacksonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2015
- State Of Washington v. Phillip Linch SchloredtCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2013