State v. Tuinman
State v. Tuinman, 2023 UT App 83 (Harris, J.)
Tuinman was convicted of various crimes and raised five issues on appeal. The Utah Court of Appeals affirmed her conviction, holding, among other things:
- The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding alibi evidence, nor was counsel deficient in “opening the door” to admission of two previously excluded statements.
- Tuinman did not demonstrate that her speedy trial right was violated.
- Practice Tip: In a claim for violating the right to a speedy trial, the reason for the delay is much more important than the time delayed.
- Practice Tip: In dicta, the court noted that delays associated with “a once-in-a-century worldwide pandemic should not in fairness be held against the State in a Sixth Amendment speedy trial analysis.”