Opinion ID: 884525
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: issues

Text: ¶ 47 Did the State violate Olmsted's right to a speedy trial? ¶ 48 As stated above, whether a defendant has been denied a speedy trial is a question of constitutional law. See City of Billings v. Bruce, 1998 MT 186, ¶ 18, ___ Mont. ___, ¶ 18, 965 P.2d 866, ¶ 18, 55 St. Rep. 750, ¶ 18. We review a district court's conclusions of law to determine whether its interpretation of the law is correct. See Carbon County v. Union Reserve Coal Co. (1995), 271 Mont. 459, 469, 898 P.2d 680, 686. ¶ 49 A criminal defendant's right to a speedy trial is guaranteed by the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and Article II, Section 24, of the Montana Constitution. See State v. Weeks (1995), 270 Mont. 63, 71, 891 P.2d 477, 482. We review claims that a speedy trial was denied based on the four-part test established by the United States Supreme Court in Barker v. Wingo (1972), 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33 L.Ed.2d 101, as applied in City of Billings v. Bruce, 1998 MT 186, ¶ 19, ___ Mont. ___, ¶ 19, 965 P.2d 866, ¶ 19, 55 St. Rep. 570, ¶ 19. According to Barker, the four factors which a court must consider when evaluating an alleged speedy trial violation are: (1) the length of the delay; (2) the reason for the delay; (3) the defendant's assertion of his right; (4) and the prejudice to the defendant. See Barker, 407 U.S. at 530, 92 S.Ct. at 2192, 33 L.Ed.2d at 117. Prejudice to the defense can be established based on any of the following factors: (1) pre-trial incarceration; (2) anxiety and concern to the defendant; and (3)impairment of the defense. See Barker, 407 U.S. at 532, 92 S.Ct. at 2193, 33 L.Ed.2d at 118. ¶ 50 According to our reasoning in Bruce, we apply the Barker factors in the following manner to determine whether a defendant has been denied his or her right to a speedy trial in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, or Article II, Section 24, of the Montana Constitution.