from Madison Circuit Court. (CC-13-1227).
Appellant: Chad A. Morgan, Huntsville.
Appellee: Luther Strange, Atty. Gen., and Madeline H. Lewis,
Asst. Atty. Gen.
Judge., Windom, P.J., and Welch, Kellum, and Joiner, JJ.,
Allen Batts was convicted of trafficking in cocaine, a
violation of § 13A-12-231(2), Ala. Code 1975, and of
first-degree criminal mischief, a violation of §
13A-7-21, Ala. Code 1975. He was sentenced as a habitual
felony offender to life imprisonment without the possibility
of parole for the trafficking conviction and to 25 years'
imprisonment for the criminal-mischief conviction. This
review of the record reveals that Batts was arrested for the
charged crimes on February 2, 2009, but was not brought to
trial until August 11, 2014. On May 8, 2009, Batts filed a
motion in which he demanded a speedy trial. On April 12,
2013, Batts filed a motion to dismiss the charges against
him, alleging a violation of his right to a speedy trial
under the United States Supreme Court's holding in
Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S.Ct. 2182, 33
L.Ed.2d 101 (1972).
trial court held a hearing on Batts's motion to dismiss
the morning of trial. At the hearing, the following exchange
" [Defense counsel]: Judge, just in reference to the
motion [to dismiss], for simplicity's sake, I just
reiterate my motion in full as of now with the caselaw that
was presented. It was presumptively prejudicial against my
client for the case to be ongoing for 50 months when I filed
the motion -- it was in the 50th month when I filed the
motion. Now we are over 60 months since the time he was
arrested for this case. He asserted that right for speedy
trial back in 2009 through his former counsel. Judge, we
would ask the case be dismissed for lack of a speedy trial,
which is prejudicial in the difference --
" THE COURT: The Court has looked at your argument
regarding your motion and is somewhat familiar with the
caselaw regarding that issue, and the Court determines that
this is not a case that should be granted dismissal on the
basis of lack of speedy trial; and, therefore, your motion is
(R. 6-7.) Nothing else is contained in the record regarding
Batts's motion to dismiss on a speedy-trial ground.
appeal, Batts argues, among other things, that the trial
court erred by failing to consider the factors established in
Barker v. Wingo. In Barker, the United States
Supreme Court directed that, when determining whether a
defendant's constitutional right ...