People v. Totzke

State dismissed charges of obstructing a police officer by nolle prosequi, and then waited 285 days to re-charge Defendant. Due process is the only relevant consideration during period of time between dismissal by nolle prosequi and filing of new charge. Thus, only a due process analysis applied to delays in case. Two prongs of substantial prejudice and intentional tactical maneuvering by State must be established for delay to violate due process. Court is to consider whether Defendant was denied her speedy-trial rights by passage of time in two prosecutions. Nearly 29 months which elapsed between commencement of first prosecution and date when Defendant first moved to dismiss on speedy-trial grounds is presumptively prejudicial delay sufficient to trigger application of remaining speedy-trial factors. (JORGENSEN and McLAREN, concurring.)