Opinion

Fernandez v. State ex rel. Department of Public Safety

389 P.3d 393
2016 OK CIV APP 82
2016 Okla. Civ. App. LEXIS 50

Court: Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Filed: Jul 29, 2016
Status: Published
Author: Joplin
On the bench: Bell, Hetherington, Joplin
Cited by: 4 cases
Authority: More cited than 23.2%

The opinion

JOPLIN, J.,

dissenting:

¶ 1 I respectfully disagree. I believe the majority has incorrectly applied the four factors balancing test in Pierce v. State ex rel. Dep’t. of Pub. Safety, 2014 OK 37 , 327 P.3d 530 . Unlike in Pierce , there is no evidence in the present case of an intentional delay by DPS, nor a motive to delay, which resulted in real prejudice to Appellee. Absent a finding of intentional delay or actual prejudice, a holding that Appellee’s right to a speedy trial was violated actually fails the test required by Pierce in order to affirm the trial court. Therefore, I dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.