In Barker v. Wingo, supra, Mr. Justice Powell stated at p. 530 with respect to the length of delay: "The length of the delay is to some extent a triggering mechanism. Until there is some delay which is presumptively prejudicial, there is no necessity for inquiry into the other factors that go into the balance. Nevertheless, because of the imprecision of the right to speedy trial, the length of delay that will provoke such an inquiry is necessarily dependent upon the peculiar circumstances of the case. To take but one example, the delay that can be tolerated for an ordinary street crime is considerably less than for a serious, complex conspiracy charge."
 The offence charged in this case is certainly nothing more than an ordinary street crime. It is not suggested that there is anything complex about the evidence or the law relating to it. I am of the view that the delay of 14 months in this case is presumptively prejudicial and that I must consider the other three factors referred to by Mr. Justice Powell in Barker v. Wingo.
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.