Summary
The Fifth Circuit considers Brian Scott Berryman’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 challenge arising from a 1,233-day delay before trial. The court holds that once a speedy-trial violation is established under Barker v. Wingo, dismissal of the indictment is the only permissible remedy, even where the indictment contains multiple counts and the violation was analyzed as to only one count. The court reverses the denial of habeas relief and remands with directions to issue the writ.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether, under Barker v. Wingo and Strunk v. United States, a finding that a defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy-trial right was violated as to one count of a multi-count indictment requires dismissal of the entire indictment rather than only that count.
- Whether the Mississippi Court of Appeals unreasonably applied clearly established Supreme Court law under 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1) by affirming dismissal of only one count.
- Whether the state court's alternative application of the Barker factors to the remaining count was unreasonable.
Holdings
- Once a court determines that a defendant's Sixth Amendment speedy-trial right has been violated, the only permissible remedy is dismissal of the indictment, including when the violation is found as to one count of a multi-count indictment; a court may not dismiss only the affected count.
- A state court unreasonably applies clearly established federal law when, after finding a speedy-trial violation, it refuses to apply the specific Supreme Court rule requiring dismissal of the indictment.
Key quotations
“But once it is determined that a violation has occurred, courts have no choice of remedy and must dismiss the indictment.” (11)
“It was an unreasonable application of Barker and its progeny for the state court, upon finding a speedy trial violation, to dismiss one count, rather than the indictment.” (17)
“The district court’s judgment is REVERSED, and this case is REMANDED with instructions to grant Berryman’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus and to take any further appropriate action.” (17)
Factual background
Berryman was arrested after witnesses identified him as having fired a .22-caliber rifle into a neighbor's dwelling. He remained incarcerated for 1,233 days before trial, during which multiple administrative, judicial, counsel-related, and scheduling problems delayed the proceedings. A defense witness, Marshall Edge, died during the delay, and Berryman asserted that Edge would have supported his defense. The state trial court found a speedy-trial violation but dismissed only the shooting-into-a-dwelling count, while Berryman was tried and convicted on the firearm-possession count.
Procedural history
Berryman was charged in Mississippi state court with shooting into a dwelling and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. After 1,233 days of pretrial detention, the state trial court found a speedy-trial violation as to Count I and dismissed only that count, allowing Count II to proceed to trial. Berryman was convicted on Count II, and the Mississippi Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that the speedy-trial analysis and remedy could be applied count by count. The Mississippi Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court denied further review. The federal district court denied Berryman's § 2254 petition but granted a certificate of appealability.
Remand instructions
Reverse the district court's judgment, grant Berryman's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, and take any further appropriate action.