People v. Lawson

Mr. PRESIDING JUSTICE TRAPP,

dissenting:

The trial court found that a delay of approximately one year between the dates of the offenses and of the indictment was prejudicial, both per se and as a matter of fact. This court properly rejected the determination of per se prejudice.

The record does not support the conclusion of the trial court that the defendant has shown actual prejudice stated in the finding:

“That the defendant has established by his sworn testimony in open court a plausible claim of inability to recall or reconstruct the events of the day of the offense, and has by his testimony…