Case ID: f-appx_79/html/0721-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.\n    ", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Warren Pierre CANADY, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Doug DRETKE, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division, Respondent-Appellee.
    No. 03-20209.
    Summary Calendar.
    United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    Nov. 6, 2003.
    
      Warren Pierre Canady, pro se, Tennessee Colony, TX, for Petitioner-Appellant.
    Karyl Krug, Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General for the State of Texas, Austin, TX, for Respondent-Appellee.
    Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

Warren Pierre Canady, Texas prisoner # 728784, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition in which he challenged his conviction for theft. As an initial matter, Canady’s motions to supplement, which request that the record be supplemented with documents already part of the record on appeal, are DENIED. His motion to file a supplemental reply brief is GRANTED.

Canady argues that he was denied a speedy trial. Although the 17-month delay is “presumptively prejudicial,” United States v. Garcia, 995 F.2d 556, 560 (5th Cir.1993), and Canady timely asserted his right to a speedy trial, our review of the record reveals that Canady failed to satisfy the other factors (reason for the delay and resulting prejudice) announced in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 515, 530, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101 (1972). See Nelson v. Hargett, 989 F.2d 847, 852 (5th Cir. 1993); Cowart v. Hargett, 16 F.3d 642, 647 (5th Cir.1994). Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 
      
       Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.