The U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear, and will most certainly overrule, and odd decision of the Vermont Supreme Court dismissing a conviction on speedy trial grounds because of delays attributed solely to the defendant’s public defenders. The Court reasoned that the public defenders were State actors and the defendant should therefore receive the benefit of a speedy trial bar to prosecution by the State. Read the decision from the State Supreme court by clicking Vermont v. Brillon .
Here are the issues as described by the U. S. Supreme Court:
1. Whether continuances and delays caused solely by an indigent defendant’s public defender can arise to a speedy trial right violation, and be charged against the State pursuant to the test in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972), on the theory that public defenders are paid by the state (with a small “s”).
2. Whether the right to counsel, as established in Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), should result in broader speedy trial rights to indigent defendants than defendants who are able to retain private counsel, such that only delays by private counsel get charged against the defendant under the Barker v. Wingo test.
Here is a link to the Respondent’s Reply Brief recently filed.
