State v. Hessler

Summary

The Washington Supreme Court reviews the reversal of a dismissal of first degree theft charges based on an alleged violation of the former speedy trial rule. The court holds that the threshold issue is whether the defendant was amenable to process during the period of delay, and that the State's due diligence obligation applies only during periods when he was amenable. Because factual issues remained regarding when the defendant returned to Washington and whether the State thereafter acted diligently, the court remands for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. The Striker rule applies when a defendant is amenable to process and a lengthy delay between the filing of the charge and the first court appearance occurred through no fault or connivance of the defendant. A defendant bears the initial burden of showing amenability to process.
2. A defendant who is out of state and not incarcerated is not amenable to process within the meaning of the Striker rule during that period, but the defendant may become amenable to process upon returning to Washington.
3. The Court of Appeals properly reversed the superior court's dismissal, but the matter must be remanded for further proceedings because factual issues remain regarding when Hessler became amenable to process and whether the State acted with due diligence thereafter.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Striker constructive-arraignment rule applies only if the defendant was amenable to process during the period of delay.
2. Whether the Court of Appeals properly reversed the superior court's dismissal without first determining when Hessler became amenable to process.
3. Whether factual issues remained concerning Hessler's amenability to process after his possible return to Washington and the State's due diligence thereafter.

Disposition

affirmed