Arkansas

Criminal Procedure

Rule 28.3 – Excluded Periods

The following periods shall be excluded in computing the time for trial. Such periods shall be set forth by the court in a written order or docket entry, but it shall not be necessary for the court to make the determination until the defendant has moved to enforce his right to a speedy trial pursuant to Rule 28 unless it is specifically provided to the contrary below. The number of days of the excluded period or periods shall be added to the time applicable to the defendant as set forth in Rules 28.1 and 28.2 to determine the limitations and consequences applicable to the defendant.

(a) The period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the defendant, including but not limited to an examination and hearing on the competency of the defendant and the period during which he is incompetent to stand trial, hearings on pretrial motions, interlocutory appeals, and trials of other charges against the defendant. No pretrial motion shall be held under advisement for more than thirty (30) days, and the period of time in excess of thirty (30) days during which any such motion is held under advisement shall not be considered an excluded period.

(b) The period of delay resulting from a continuance attributable to congestion of the trial docket if in a written order or docket entry at the time the continuance is granted:

(1) the court explains with particularity the reasons the trial docket does not permit trial on the date originally scheduled;

(2) the court determines that the delay will not prejudice the defendant; and

(3) the court schedules the trial on the next available date permitted by the trial docket.

(c) The period of delay resulting from a continuance granted at the request of the defendant or his counsel. All continuances granted at the request of the defendant or his counsel shall be to a day certain, and the period of delay shall be from the date the continuance is granted until such subsequent date contained in the order or docket entry granting the continuance.

(d) The period of delay resulting from a continuance (calculated from the date the continuance is granted until the subsequent date contained in the order or docket entry granting the continuance) granted at the request of the prosecuting attorney, if:

(1) the continuance is granted because of the unavailability of evidence material to the state’s case, when due diligence has been exercised to obtain such evidence and there are reasonable grounds to believe that such evidence will be available at a later date; or

(2) the continuance is granted in a felony case to allow the prosecuting attorney additional time to prepare the state’s case and additional time is justified because of the exceptional complexity of the particular case.

(e) The period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of the defendant. A defendant shall be considered absent whenever his whereabouts are unknown. A defendant shall also be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for the trial cannot be obtained or he resists being returned to the state for trial.

(f) The time between a dismissal or nolle prosequi upon motion of the prosecuting attorney for good cause shown, and the time the charge is later filed for the same offense or an offense required to be joined with that offense.

(g) A reasonable period of delay when the defendant is joined for trial with a codefendant as to whom the time for trial has not run and there is good cause for not granting a severance. In all other cases the defendant acting with due diligence shall be granted a severance so that he may be tried within the time limits applicable to him.

(h) Other periods of delay for good cause.

Ark. R. Crim. P. 28.3

Reporter’s Notes to 1999 Amendments: Subsection (b) has been amended and subsection (i) has been moved to the opening paragraph. These changes have been made to address recurrent problems arising in cases. E.g., Hicks v. State, 305 Ark. 393, 808 S.W. 2d 348 (1991). The opening paragraph was added which includes language formerly in subsection (i), but further provides that the trial court may determine the excluded periods when the defendant has moved for dismissal pursuant to Rule 28.1 rather than at an earlier date although the judge is still free to do so earlier. This finding is a determination of the excluded periods. Subsection (b) was amended to make more practical a continuance granted because of congestion of the trial docket. The three-pronged finding was substituted for the previous standard which required a finding of “exceptional circumstances.” This requirement of the entry of a contemporaneous written order explaining the reasons for the continuance, finding that the defendant is not prejudiced, and scheduling a new trial date is in addition to the finding required as to the periods to be excluded. Typically, the period to be excluded under subsection (b) will be from the date on which the trial was scheduled as specified in (b)(1) to the rescheduled date as specified in (b)(3).

← Previous Next →