In Re Response to the Covid-19 Pandemic––return to Pre-Pandemic Standard for Finding of Good-Cause Delays Under Speedy-Trial Rule ( 2023 )

Cite as 2023 Ark. 55SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
IN RE RESPONSE TO THE COVID-19 Opinion Delivered: March 30, 2023
PANDEMIC––RETURN TO PRE-
PANDEMIC STANDARD FOR
FINDING OF GOOD-CAUSE DELAYS
UNDER SPEEDY-TRIAL RULE
PER CURIAM
Today, the court announces a return to the pre-COVID-19-pandemic standard for
the finding of “good-cause” delays for speedy-trial purposes. Generally, when a defendant
makes a prima facie showing of a speedy-trial violation, the burden shifts to the State to show
that the delay was the result of the defendant’s conduct or was otherwise justified pursuant
to one or more of the excludable periods outlined in Arkansas Rule of Criminal Procedure
28.3. E.g., State v. Crawford, 373 Ark. 95, 281 S.W.3d 736 (2008). One of the excludable
periods outlined in Rule 28.3 is a “period[] of delay for good cause.” Ark. R. Crim. P. 28.3(h).
Thus, prior to the pandemic, the State bore the burden of proving “good cause” to exclude
a period of delay under subsection (h). During the pandemic, however, this court suspended
in-person proceedings and jury trials at various times and instituted a presumption that
delays “due to precautions against the COVID-19 pandemic” constitute “good cause” under
Rule 28.3(h). See In re Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic—Resumption of Jury Trials, 2021 Ark.
72, at 2 (per curiam); In re Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2020 Ark. 384, at 3 (per
curiam); In re Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic, 2020 Ark. 116, at 3 (per curiam).
Due to the waning of the pandemic, the court finds that the presumption instituted
in favor of the State for periods of delay due to precautions against COVID-19 is no longer
necessary. Effective immediately, future delays due to COVID-19 precautions will no longer
be presumed “good cause.” As was required before the pandemic, when a defendant presents
a prima facie showing of a speedy-trial violation, the State will bear the burden of proving
whether any delay constitutes “good cause” without the benefit of any presumption.
The court understands that COVID-19 precautions may have resulted in recent
continuances that are ongoing. In cases where the most recent continuance was granted due
to COVID-19 precautions, the State shall continue to enjoy the presumption of “good cause”
until (i) the date on which any other continuance is granted, or (ii) the date on which the
case is currently set for trial, whichever occurs first.
It is so ORDERED.
2