Statutory speedy trial reversal

Shawn Minihan won in State v. Hughes, No. 93,554 (Kan. App. March 17, 2006) (unpublished), reversing several possession convictions out of Reno County. The issue on appeal was the violation of the speedy trial statute. The district court had denied the motion to dismiss finding that Mr. Hughes’ motions to suppress had caused delay. But the COA disagreed:

Hughes filed no motions after May 25, 2004, and there were no motions hearings held after June 21, 2004. The cause for the delay in Hughes’ trial is largely a mystery. The record on appeal is silent as to the reason for the rest of the delay, with the exception of the 8 days due to the absence of the State’s witness.

After excluding 27 days for the time between the filing of Mr. Hughes motions to suppress and the hearings on those motion, the COA found that 106 days from arraignment were chargeable to the state, entitling Mr. Hughes to discharge.

[Update: The state did not file a petition for review and the mandate issued in this case on April 20, 2006.]