State v. Bircher

Delay in court scheduling that can be attributed to the state is reasonable under ORS 135.747 if it does not fall "outside the norm of acceptable court scheduling practices."

Defendant appealed his conviction of misdemeanor DUII under ORS 813.010(1). He argued the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss the charges under the speedy trial provision, ORS 135.747. Defendant stated that the delay he faced while incarcerated was attributable to the State and that the delay was unreasonable. The State argued that they were responsible for some of the delay, but significant delay could also be attributed to Defendant. The State further argued the delay attributable to the State was reasonable under the attendant circumstances. The Court held that Defendant knowingly failed to demand a speedy trial under ORS 135.760 for the period of time he deemed unreasonable, therefore attributing the delay to Defendant. Continuing, the remaining period of time that was attributable to the state was reasonable under ORS 135.747. Therefore, the trial court did not err in failing to dismiss the charges. Affirmed.