There are foms to waive speedy trial, but there are no forms necessary to request it. Speedy trial is understood to always exist because it is guaranteed in the Constitution.
by your peers and fast and speedy
Filing a motion for continuance by the defense does not inherently constitute a waiver of the right to a speedy trial. However, if the continuance is granted and delays the trial, it can affect the timing of the speedy trial analysis. Courts often consider the reasons for the continuance and the overall context to determine if the defendant's right to a speedy trial has been compromised. Ultimately, the specifics of the case and the jurisdiction's laws will influence this determination.
No.
I would file a motion to dismiss the case. If the prosecution has deprived the accused of his right to a speedy trial, the charges must be dismissed. Four continuances by the prosecution seems like too many to ensure the accused a speedy trial. I suggest you talk with a criminal defense attorney ASAP (if you are not already represented) , as you will need a good lawyer on your side to get the charges dropped or a speedy trial.
It's unnecessary to file a motion requesting a "speedy trial," that right is already guaranteed to you by the Constitution and is automatically applicable to all criminal court proceedings.
To request a speedy trial from another state, you typically need to file a motion with the court in that state where your case is pending. This motion should outline the reasons for your request, citing relevant laws or constitutional rights, such as the Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial. It's advisable to consult with an attorney who is licensed in that state to ensure proper procedures are followed and to increase the chances of a successful request.
"Speedy" trial does not apply to the sentencing portion of the trial.
The Sixth Amendment grants the right to a speedy trial, meaning that the state can't delay commencement of a trial indefinitely, especially if the defendant is being held in jail while awaiting trial. If the defendant is already on parole, has violated that parole, and is being held in custody, then there is no speedy trial violation because the defendant would be in custody, anyway. Under those circumstances, a judge could deny a dismissal motion based on a speedy trial violation.
It can depend entirely on what the defendant/defense attorney agreed to. Constitutional case law sets the "speedy" trial date at 90 days after indictment. However upon agreement between the defense, the prosecution, and the court, the date can be extended to whatever the defense has agreed to.
I've never heard of anybody in their right mind and with a halfway competant set of facts want a fast trial; on the other hand, a speedy trial is a totally diffierent matter. The amount of time? I just cant see that as a relevent question. (Criminal of course, civil is another matter.)
The Sixth Amendment guarantees the right to a speedy trial.