Legal Opinion

Casoli v. State

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 4, 1990No. 90-35PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

David Newbern, Justice.

Pier L. Casoli, the appellant, sought a writ of prohibition and mandamus from the circuit court to prevent a trial from taking place in Huntsville Municipal Court and to have returned to him two appearance bonds which had been forfeited. The mandamus issue on the bond forfeitures is not argued in Casoli’s brief now before us. With respect to the prohibition issue, he contended his right to a speedy trial would be violated if he were tried on a charge of driving while intoxicated, third offense. The circuit court denied the writ. The denial of the writ is not an…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Barker v. WingoSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  2. Divanovich v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1981
  3. Robinson v. SutterfieldSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1990
  4. Callender v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1978

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Sexson v. Municipal CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993
  2. McFarland v. LindseySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
  3. Prine v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  4. Prine v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2007
  5. Sexson v. Municipal CourtSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API