Speedy Trial Deadline Blown – Violation Undoes Sex Assault Conviction As Colorado Court Orders Dismissal With Prejudice

Judge Johnson denied the dismissal motion, finding “good cause” to extend the trial date based on docket congestion. But good cause under general case management principles isn’t the same as statutory authority under Colorado’s speedy trial requirements—a distinction that proved decisive on appeal.

The appellate panel systematically demolished the prosecution’s arguments with the kind of methodical legal reasoning that makes constitutional protections more than parchment promises. First, they found that neither McIntosh v. United States nor Harrow v. Department of Defense—the Supreme Court cases the prosecution cited—actually dealt with speedy trial challenges. Wrong constitutional neighborhood entirely.

More importantly, Colorado’s speedy trial statute doesn’t operate like federal rules that allow judicial balancing tests. “The relevant Colorado statute … explicitly mandates reversal if the deadline is not met,” Judge Tow wrote, cutting through any suggestion that courts could weigh competing interests when the six-month clock runs out.