Opinion ID: 1652107
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: whether the trial court erred in overruling, without articulation, the defendant's motion to dismiss on grounds of a violation of the defendant's sixth amendment speedy trial rights and without even requiring the state to respond?

Text: ¶ 12. DeLoach argues that his speedy trial rights were violated because the State did not try him until some two years after his arrest. He further argues that the trial court erred by not requiring the State to give good cause for the delay and by its failure to articulate a reason for the denial of the motion. Review of a speedy trial claim encompasses the fact question of whether the trial delay rose from good cause. Under this Court's standard of review, this Court will uphold a decision based on substantial, credible evidence. Folk v. State, 576 So.2d 1243, 1247 (Miss.1991). If no probative evidence supports the trial court's finding of good cause, this Court will ordinarily reverse. Folk v. State, 576 So.2d at 1247. The state bears the burden of proving good cause for a speedy trial delay, and thus bears the risk of non-persuasion. Flores v. State, 574 So.2d 1314, 1318 (Miss.1990). ¶ 13. The facts pertinent for consideration of DeLoach's allegation of constitutional violation of his right to a speedy trial are necessarily recited.