Because we are reversing and dismissing this case due to the violation of
Yarbrough’s right to a speedy trial, we will not address his second point.
ARKANSAS COURT OF APPEALS
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
JOSEPHINE LINKER HART, Judge
STATE OF ARKANSAS
December 13, 2006
APPEAL FROM THE CRAWFORD
COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
[NO. CR 2003-514-B]
HON. GARY RAY COTTRELL,
REVERSED AND DISMISSED
Christopher Charles Yarbrough was convicted in a Crawford County jury trial of
possession of marijuana with intent to deliver and possession of drug paraphernalia, for
which he received sentences of sixty and thirty-six months respectively in the Arkansas
Department of Correction, to be served consecutively. On appeal, he argues that his right to
a speedy trial was violated and that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress
physical evidence seized in a traffic stop. We hold that Yarbrough’s right to a speedy trial
was violated; therefore, we reverse and dismiss.1
On November 1, 2004, Yarbrough filed a motion to dismiss for lack of speedy trial.
It was undisputed that Yarbrough made a prima facie case that he was not tried within twelve
The written notice to Yarbrough’s trial counsel stated in pertinent part:
NOTE: Neither Counsel nor Defendants will be required to appear on this date IF the
attorney has submitted to the Court, at least two (2) days prior to the Plea/Trial Request
Date, a written request to be excused which also advises the Court whether their client is
requesting a trial date or wishes to enter a change of plea. (Emphasis in original.)
months of his October 30, 2003, arrest. The State, however, argued that two periods of time
should be charged to Yarbrough.
The first period, some twelve days, was the time between Yarbrough’s scheduled
arraignment, for which he was late, and when his rescheduled arraignment was held.
Because Yarbrough was late, a Failure to Appear Warrant was issued. How