Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
55 Michigan opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2026 33 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Michigan 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 |
|---|---|---|
People v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2026“Under the Barker test, a ‘presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Id. (cleaned up). 2026The prosecution concedes that prejudice is presumed because the delay in this case exceeded eighteen months. “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Id. | 14 | 40 |
People v. Waclawskigreen2 sentences2025“Under the Barker test, ‘the presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.’ ” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 , quoting People v Wickham, 200 Mich App 106, 109-110 ; 503 NW2d 701 (1993). “[T]here is no set number of days between a defendant’s arrest and trial that is determinative of a speedy trial claim.” Waclawski, 286 Mich App at 665 . 2025“Under the Barker test, ‘the presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.’ ” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 , quoting People v Wickham, 200 Mich App 106, 109-110 ; 503 NW2d 701 (1993). “[T]here is no set number of days between a defendant’s arrest and trial that is determinative of a speedy trial claim.” Waclawski, 286 Mich App at 665 . | 1 | 6 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Michigan. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Wickham
green
2 sentences2025“Under the Barker test, ‘the presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.’ ” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 , quoting People v Wickham, 200 Mich App 106, 109-110 ; 503 NW2d 701 (1993). “[T]here is no set number of days between a defendant’s arrest and trial that is determinative of a speedy trial claim.” Waclawski, 286 Mich App at 665 . 2025“Under the Barker test, ‘the presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.’ ” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 , quoting People v Wickham, 200 Mich App 106, 109-110 ; 503 NW2d 701 (1993). “[T]here is no set number of days between a defendant’s arrest and trial that is determinative of a speedy trial claim.” Waclawski, 286 Mich App at 665 . | 13 | 1997–2025 |
People v. Rivera
green
2 sentences2025“When the delay is more than 18 months, prejudice is presumed, and the prosecution must show that no injury occurred.” Id. “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 (quotation marks and citation omitted). -10- On September 24, 2020, Childs filed a handwritten motion to dismiss the case due to a speedy trial violation, noting that he was arrested in this case on December 8, 2019, and had b 2025“When the delay is more than 18 months, prejudice is presumed, and the prosecution must show that no injury occurred.” Id. “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 4 | 2024–2025 |
Barker v. Wingo
green
2 sentences2026Id. 2026Id. | 3 | 2025–2026 |
People v. Cain
green
2 sentences2023Nevertheless, “a delay of eighteen months or more, as in this case, is presumed prejudicial and places a burden on the prosecutor to rebut that presumption.” People v Cain, 238 Mich App 95, 112 ; 605 NW2d 28 (1999). “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 (quotation marks and citation omitted). 2023Nevertheless, “a delay of eighteen months or more, as in this case, is presumed prejudicial and places a burden on the prosecutor to rebut that presumption.” People v Cain, 238 Mich App 95, 112 ; 605 NW2d 28 (1999). “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Williams, 475 Mich at 262 (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 3 | 2018–2023 |
People v. Lown
green
2 sentences2025Id. “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted). 2025Id. “[A] presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of the competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial.” Id. (quotation marks and citation omitted). | 2 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Gilmore
green
2 sentences2017The establishment of presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial. [People v Gilmore, 222 Mich App 442, 459 ; 564 NW2d 158 (1997) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).] In this case, defendant was arrested on February 8, 2012, and his jury trial did not commence until February 9, 2016, approximately four years later. 2017The establishment of presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial. [People v Gilmore, 222 Mich App 442, 459 ; 564 NW2d 158 (1997) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).] In this case, defendant was arrested on February 8, 2012, and his jury trial did not commence until February 9, 2016, approximately four years later. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
People v. Gilmore
green
2 sentences2017The establishment of presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial. [People v Gilmore, 222 Mich App 442, 459 ; 564 NW2d 158 (1997) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).] In this case, defendant was arrested on February 8, 2012, and his jury trial did not commence until February 9, 2016, approximately four years later. 2017The establishment of presumptively prejudicial delay triggers an inquiry into the other factors to be considered in the balancing of competing interests to determine whether a defendant has been deprived of the right to a speedy trial. [People v Gilmore, 222 Mich App 442, 459 ; 564 NW2d 158 (1997) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted).] In this case, defendant was arrested on February 8, 2012, and his jury trial did not commence until February 9, 2016, approximately four years later. | 2 | 2017–2017 |
United States v. MacDonald
green
2 sentences2020“Although delay prior to arrest or indictment may give rise to a due process claim under the Fifth Amendment, or a claim under any applicable statutes of limitations, no Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial arises until charges are pending.” United States v MacDonald, 456 US 1, 7 ; 102 S Ct 1497 ; 71 L Ed 2d 696 (1982). 2020“Although delay prior to arrest or indictment may give rise to a due process claim under the Fifth Amendment, or a claim under any applicable statutes of limitations, no Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial arises until charges are pending.” United States v MacDonald, 456 US 1, 7 ; 102 S Ct 1497 ; 71 L Ed 2d 696 (1982). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
People v. Holtzer
green
2 sentences2016In contrast, where the delay is less than 18 months, “the burden is on the defendant to show actual prejudice.” People v Holtzer, 255 Mich App 478, 492 ; 660 NW2d 405 (2003). 2016In contrast, where the delay is less than 18 months, “the burden is on the defendant to show actual prejudice.” People v Holtzer, 255 Mich App 478, 492 ; 660 NW2d 405 (2003). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
People v. Rosengren
green
2 sentences1993People v Rosengren, 159 Mich App 492, 506 ; 407 NW2d 391 (1987). 1993People v Rosengren, 159 Mich App 492, 506 ; 407 NW2d 391 (1987). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.