Opinion ID: 1324615
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Showing of Prejudice

Text: With regard to the final prong of the Foddrell factors, the Appellant's evidence of prejudice is extremely limited. The Appellant's primary assertion in this regard is that the delay prevented him from calling four witnesses on his behalf. Those witnesses, although they were not eyewitnesses to the incident in question, would allegedly have testified that the victim had been the aggressor in past encounters between the two men. Two of the potential witnesses, Paulette Patrick and Michael Hinkle, had died prior to trial. Two others, Kenneth Allen and Shannon Allen, had moved out of state. However, at least one of the out-of-state witnesses, Kenneth Allen, was eventually located and testified at trial on the Appellant's behalf. Moreover, the Appellant asserted the theory of self-defense at trial, and none of these four individuals was an eyewitness to the crime. They would only have been presented for the purpose of testifying regarding alleged provocations that occurred two months prior to the incident in question. When the Appellant presented this matter to the trial court in the form of a pre-trial motion to dismiss, the trial court found no prejudice. The trial court explained that the Appellant had additional witnesses who are available to testify on his behalf. The trial court further found that the affidavit that the Defendant submitted to the Court is self-serving. The trial court found no corroborative evidence that verifies what Paulette Patrick and Michael Hinkle would have said or that it would be relevant. Having evaluated the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the Appellant's assertion of his rights, and the prejudice to the Appellant, this Court finds that the Appellant's Sixth Amendment rights to a speedy trial were not violated in this case.