State v. Wright

Summary

The court held that Alaska’s constitutional speedy-trial clock begins when the State files a felony information, even before arrest or indictment. Applying the four-factor balancing framework, it upheld the superior court’s determination that Wright bore primary responsibility for the nearly five-year pre-arrest delay because he left Alaska and moved among states to avoid prosecution, while the State’s negligence was secondary. The court therefore reversed the court of appeals and remanded with directions to affirm the superior court’s denial of Wright’s motion to dismiss.