Whether the reason-for-delay factor in a Sixth Amendment speedy trial analysis weighs against the government when it intentionally waits and does not serve a defendant with notice of a detainer, and whether irretrievable cell site location information and lost cell phone data can be prejudicial to an alibi defense under the fourth speedy trial factor, and whether a defendant has the right to alternate defense counsel when counsel fails to present these claims

QUESTIONS PRESENTED © . In a Sixth Amendment Constitutional speedy trial analysis, will the second factor, the Reason-for-Delay weigh against the government when it intentionally waits and does not serve a defendant with notice of a detainer while that defendant is confined in another jurisdiction resolving other matters? Or, should this be a neutral factor, or as in this particular case, weigh against a defendant? Also, can irretrievable cell site location information ("CSLI") from a phone carrier and lost cell phone data contained on the device of a missing phone be prejudicial to an alibi defense with respect to the fourth factor of a speedy trial claim? Finally, related to these two foregoing questions, does defendant have the right under the Sixth Amendment to alternate defense counsel when his Attorney fails to present these claims to the court and is thereby rendering ineffective assistance of counsel; or should a defendant be permitted to represent himself under these circumstances? PARTIES , E. Garreth Winstead, Assistant United States Attorney, for the Plaintiff Appellee. Delano Medina, for the Defendant Appellant.