An Omaha man accused of shooting his father will have the criminal charges against him thrown out after the Nebraska Supreme Court ruled his right to a speedy trial was violated.
On Friday, the state’s highest court reversed decisions from the Nebraska Court of Appeals and the Douglas County District Court, both of which denied motions from a criminal defendant to dismiss the case against him after his trial was continued over his objection. The defendant, 27-year-old Justin Rashad, faced charges of first-degree assault and use of a firearm to commit a felony after he allegedly shot his father in the head in 2021.
Under Nebraska law, defendants have a statutory right to have their case presented to a jury within six months of the date the charging document was filed. Rashad’s trial was scheduled for 10 months after he was initially charged.
The primary burden to ensure a trial takes place within speedy trial guidelines is on the state.
People are also reading…
If a case is not prosecuted in a timely manner, the defendant is entitled to have the case dismissed, unless “good cause†for a delay is shown. There is no statutory definition of good cause, and it is decided on a case-by-case basis, though the Supreme Court noted the “findings must be supported by the evidence in the record, and the State bears the burden of establishing facts showing that good cause existed.â€
Rashad was charged with the two felonies in April 2021. By June, Douglas County District Court Judge Marlon Polk set the case for trial in October.
But shortly before the trial was set to begin, according to court documents, the parties were informed the trial would be continued because the judge had another trial scheduled on the same week. At a hearing on Oct. 26, 2021, Rashad said he was “very concerned about his speedy trial rights†and objected to the continuance, requesting that he be tried in November to comply with speedy trial requirements.
Rashad’s request was denied, and Polk set the trial for February 2022. Days before the February trial was set to began, defense attorney Korey Taylor filed a motion to dismiss the case for speedy trial violations.
“State preference or convenience does not usurp the speedy trial rights of defendants,†Taylor wrote. “By the time trial is now scheduled to commence in this case, over 10 months would have passed.â€
Polk denied the motion, finding there was good cause to grant the continuance. Rashad appealed to the Nebraska Court of Appeals, which affirmed Polk’s ruling in April 2023 . He then appealed the case to the Nebraska Supreme Court.
In its Friday opinion, the court said it didn’t find evidence of “good cause†to continue the trial, meaning the request for absolute discharge should have been granted. In previous cases, docket congestion — or the court’s busy schedule — has been recognized as good cause for a continuance. But the court said there wasn’t sufficient evidence to prove docket congestion was to blame in this case.
“The situation here could have been avoided if the trial court had issued a written order on the motion for a continuance,†the opinion reads. “Additionally... the State could have introduced other evidence to substantiate docket congestion, such as scheduling issues or case priorities. The State took no such steps in this case.â€
The case will be remanded back to the Douglas County District Court with instructions to grant the defendant’s motion to dismiss the charges.