11 Hawaii opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2025 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Hawaii courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ferrarogreen2 sentences2005This court found in State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284 , 800 P.2d 623 (1990), that “[prejudice in a speedy trial claim is evaluated in the light of the interests protected by the right. 2005This court found in State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284 , 800 P.2d 623 (1990), that “[prejudice in a speedy trial claim is evaluated in the light of the interests protected by the right. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Whitegreen2 sentences2025See id. at 203 , 990 P.2d at 101 (holding that eleven-month delay warranted inquiry into the other Barker factors). 2025See id. at 203 , 990 P.2d at 101 (holding that eleven-month delay warranted inquiry into the other Barker factors). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Visintin.green1 sentence2020While 8 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER there are no other "findings" in the record that touch upon the Barker factors, and no written findings entered, it appears that Preston's trial was conducted over a period of nearly six months, on seven trial days, in roughly one to two hour segments.4 In State v. Visintin, 143 Hawai#i 143, 157-58, 426 P.3d 367, 381-82 (2018), the supreme court held that this court erred in considering the defendant's speedy trial claim on the merits because the trial court in that case had not considered the Barker factors and had not | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Ernesto Godoy, Fermin Enrique Bergouignangreen1 sentence2017See United States v. Godoy, 821 F.2d 1498, 1506 (11th Cir. 1987) (stating that the defendants failed to show “any unique circumstances” that weigh on the impact of reprosecution on the administration of the speedy trial rule and on the administration of justice). | 1 | 1 |
Llewyn J. Cowart v. Edward Hargett, Superintendent, Mississippi State Penitentiarygreen1 sentence1995Rather, the defendants moved only to have the charges dismissed, and “an assertion that charges be dismissed for a speedy trial violation is not a protected value under Barker.” Cowart v. Hargett, 16 F.3d 642, 647 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994) (citing Hill v. Wainwright, 617 F.2d 375, 379 (5th Cir.1980)). | 1 | 1 |
Paul Clifford Hill v. Louie L. Wainwright, Etc.green1 sentence1995Rather, the defendants moved only to have the charges dismissed, and “an assertion that charges be dismissed for a speedy trial violation is not a protected value under Barker.” Cowart v. Hargett, 16 F.3d 642, 647 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994) (citing Hill v. Wainwright, 617 F.2d 375, 379 (5th Cir.1980)). | 1 | 1 |
Reed v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1994State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284, 300 , 800 P.2d 623, 632 (1990) (“ ‘[A] mere assertion that one had been upset or concerned about a pending criminal prosecution is not sufficient’ to establish prejudicial anxiety.” (quoting Reed v. United States, 383 A.2d 316, 320 (D.C.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 871 , 99 S.Ct. 203 , 58 L.Ed.2d 183 (1978))); see also United States v. Simmons, 536 F.2d 827, 831-32 (9th Cir.) (“Conclusory allegations of general anxiety and depression are present in almost every criminal prosecution. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. James Henry Simmonsgreen1 sentence1994State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284, 300 , 800 P.2d 623, 632 (1990) (“ ‘[A] mere assertion that one had been upset or concerned about a pending criminal prosecution is not sufficient’ to establish prejudicial anxiety.” (quoting Reed v. United States, 383 A.2d 316, 320 (D.C.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 871 , 99 S.Ct. 203 , 58 L.Ed.2d 183 (1978))); see also United States v. Simmons, 536 F.2d 827, 831-32 (9th Cir.) (“Conclusory allegations of general anxiety and depression are present in almost every criminal prosecution. | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Phillip Kent Palmer, Joseph Philip Silverman, Ernest Smith, Freddie Daniel Milton, Edward Earl Dillingham and Wayne Franklin Deangreen1 sentence1980United States v. Garza, 547 F.2d 1234, 1235 (5th Cir. 1977) (14 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Edwards, 577 F.2d 883, 887-88 (5th Cir. 1978) (13 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Palmer, 537 F.2d 1287, 1288 (5th Cir. 1976) (22 month delay between arrest and indictment). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Arnoldo Cantu Garzagreen1 sentence1980United States v. Garza, 547 F.2d 1234, 1235 (5th Cir. 1977) (14 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Edwards, 577 F.2d 883, 887-88 (5th Cir. 1978) (13 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Palmer, 537 F.2d 1287, 1288 (5th Cir. 1976) (22 month delay between arrest and indictment). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Alvin Leon Edwardsgreen1 sentence1980United States v. Garza, 547 F.2d 1234, 1235 (5th Cir. 1977) (14 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Edwards, 577 F.2d 883, 887-88 (5th Cir. 1978) (13 month delay between arrest and indictment); United States v. Palmer, 537 F.2d 1287, 1288 (5th Cir. 1976) (22 month delay between arrest and indictment). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Hawaii. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hawaii v. Nihipali
green
2 sentences1995But Appellant also asserts a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial and “[t]he only remedy for the violation of an accused’s right to a speedy trial is a dismissal with prejudice.” State v. Nihipali, 64 Haw. 65 , 67 n. 4, 637 P.2d 407 , 408 n. 4 (1981) (emphasis added). 1995But Appellant also asserts a violation of his constitutional right to a speedy trial and “[t]he only remedy for the violation of an accused’s right to a speedy trial is a dismissal with prejudice.” State v. Nihipali, 64 Haw. 65 , 67 n. 4, 637 P.2d 407 , 408 n. 4 (1981) (emphasis added). | 2 | 1995–1995 |
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences1994While we can safely assume that Wasson, like most criminal defendants, suffered some anxious moments awaiting his trial, see Barker, 407 U.S. at 533 , 92 S.Ct. at 2193 , nevertheless, for purposes of the speedy trial analysis, something more than a bare assertion of disquietude is generally required before this form of prejudice will weigh in favor of the accused. 1994While we can safely assume that Wasson, like most criminal defendants, suffered some anxious moments awaiting his trial, see Barker, 407 U.S. at 533 , 92 S.Ct. at 2193 , nevertheless, for purposes of the speedy trial analysis, something more than a bare assertion of disquietude is generally required before this form of prejudice will weigh in favor of the accused. | 2 | 1990–1994 |
State v. Estencion
green
2 sentences2024Although the Circuit Court's examination of this factor is minimal, based on the record before it, we cannot conclude that the Circuit Court abused its discretion in finding this factor weighed in favor of dismissal with prejudice. 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER The third Estencion factor requires consideration of the impact of reprosecution on the administration of the speedy trial rule and on the administration of justice. 63 Haw. at 269 , 625 P.2d at 1044 . 2024Although the Circuit Court's examination of this factor is minimal, based on the record before it, we cannot conclude that the Circuit Court abused its discretion in finding this factor weighed in favor of dismissal with prejudice. 4 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER The third Estencion factor requires consideration of the impact of reprosecution on the administration of the speedy trial rule and on the administration of justice. 63 Haw. at 269 , 625 P.2d at 1044 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
State v. Jackson
green
2 sentences2014Finally, this court has examined the defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence claim prior to remand for a violation of the speedy trial rule under Hawai'i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 48. 15 In State v. Jackson, 81 Hawai'i 39 , 912 P.2d 71 (1996), the court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s HRPP Rule 48 motion to dismiss. 2014Finally, this court has examined the defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence claim prior to remand for a violation of the speedy trial rule under Hawai#i Rules of Penal Procedure (HRPP) Rule 48.15 In State v. Jackson, 81 Hawai#i 39, 912 P.2d 71 15 HRPP Rule 48(b)(1) (2000) generally provides that “the court shall, on motion of the defendant, dismiss the charge, with or without prejudice in its discretion, if trial is not commenced within 6 months” from the date of arrest if bail is set or from the filing of the charge, whichever (continued...) 39 *** FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS A | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Naddi v. California
green
1 sentence1995Rather, the defendants moved only to have the charges dismissed, and “an assertion that charges be dismissed for a speedy trial violation is not a protected value under Barker.” Cowart v. Hargett, 16 F.3d 642, 647 (5th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 115 S.Ct. 227 , 130 L.Ed.2d 153 (1994) (citing Hill v. Wainwright, 617 F.2d 375, 379 (5th Cir.1980)). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Card v. Denton
green
1 sentence1994State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284, 300 , 800 P.2d 623, 632 (1990) (“ ‘[A] mere assertion that one had been upset or concerned about a pending criminal prosecution is not sufficient’ to establish prejudicial anxiety.” (quoting Reed v. United States, 383 A.2d 316, 320 (D.C.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 871 , 99 S.Ct. 203 , 58 L.Ed.2d 183 (1978))); see also United States v. Simmons, 536 F.2d 827, 831-32 (9th Cir.) (“Conclusory allegations of general anxiety and depression are present in almost every criminal prosecution. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Bailey v. United States
green
1 sentence1994State v. Ferraro, 8 Haw.App. 284, 300 , 800 P.2d 623, 632 (1990) (“ ‘[A] mere assertion that one had been upset or concerned about a pending criminal prosecution is not sufficient’ to establish prejudicial anxiety.” (quoting Reed v. United States, 383 A.2d 316, 320 (D.C.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 871 , 99 S.Ct. 203 , 58 L.Ed.2d 183 (1978))); see also United States v. Simmons, 536 F.2d 827, 831-32 (9th Cir.) (“Conclusory allegations of general anxiety and depression are present in almost every criminal prosecution. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
State v. Murphy
green
1 sentence1980State v. Murphy, supra at 6 , 575 P.2d at 453 . 4 Appellant does not raise a speedy trial violation for the period from arrest to trial or indictment to trial. 5 The following cases hold that the delay between arrest and indictment did not violate the right to speedy trial. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.