Howard v. State

Under the circumstances, including the complexity of a multi-defendant RICO indictment, 42-month delay did not violate the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

J. B. Howard was indicted in December 2006 for a violation of the Georgia Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations RICO Act, OCGA § 16-14-1 et seq. , based on allegations that he was involved in a conspiracy to pass forged checks. More than three years later, he filed a plea in bar, asserting that he had been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial and seeking a dismissal of the indictment. The trial court denied the plea in bar, and Howard brought this appeal. We see no error and affirm. On December 1, 2006, a grand jury in Douglas County returned an indictment charging Howard and eleven other defendants with acquiring and maintaining property through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of OCGA § 16-14-4 a. The indictment alleged 20 distinct predicate acts of forgery as the basis for the charge. All these predicate acts involved the passing of forged checks at banks located in Douglas County, and all were alleged to have occurred in August and September 2006.

Howard was not arrested immediately for the crime charged in the indictment. Although the record does not reveal precisely what was done by Douglas County authorities to locate and apprehend Howard upon the return of the indictment, it does reflect that Howard was moving his residence between two homeless shelters in Atlanta in late 2006 and that Howard did not live at the address then appearing on his driver’s license. On March 23, 2007, Howard was arrested in Clayton County on an unrelated charge, and he was transferred to Douglas County in April, at which time he finally was arrested for the crime charged in the indictment. There is nothing in the record to suggest that Douglas County authorities knew or should have known of his whereabouts prior to his arrest in Clayton County in March 2007.

Howard v. State

Under the circumstances, including the complexity of a multi-defendant RICO indictment, 42-month delay did not violate the defendant's constitutional right to a speedy trial.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report