Opinion ID: 2330804
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: State v. Carter

Text: Stephen Donnell Carter was indicted by a Harford County grand jury for violating the controlled dangerous substance laws. On December 2, 1980, Carter was arraigned; therefore the 180-day period for trying the case expired on June 1, 1981. The initial trial date was scheduled for February 25, 1981, 85 days after arraignment. On that date a postponement was granted at the State's request because a prosecution witness was unavailable and because there was no judge available to try the case. The next scheduled trial date was April 2, 1981, the 121st day following Carter's arraignment. On April 2nd Administrative Judge Close, over the objection of defense counsel, postponed the case for cause ... because of the absence of any court, Judge, [and] jury. The transcript indicates that all three Harford County circuit court judges were involved in trying other cases on that date. The case was rescheduled for trial on June 11, 1981, ten days beyond the 180-day period. When the case was called for trial on June 11th, Carter orally moved to dismiss the indictment for failure to comply with § 591 and Rule 746. The trial judge denied the motion, stating that the administrative judge's finding that there was no Judge or Jury available [was] proper and that good cause existed. A jury found Carter guilty of possession of heroin, and he was sentenced to a term of four years incarceration. On appeal Carter raised several issues. The Court of Special Appeals reached only one of the issues, reversing on the ground that the trial court had erred in denying Carter's motion to dismiss under § 591 and Rule 746. The appellate court held that there was an absence of good cause for the postponement from April 2, 1981, to June 11, 1981. See Carter v. State, 54 Md. App. 220, 458 A.2d 480 (1983). As in the Beard case, the appellate court stated that the unavailability of judicial resources on the scheduled dates of trial may be good cause for a postponement only [u]nder extenuating circumstances, 54 Md. App. at 233 [458 A.2d 480]. The court stated that the fact that all three county circuit court judges were involved in other trials on April 2, 1981, standing alone is not good cause. Id. at 232 [458 A.2d 480].