Whether the court abused its discretion in denying the appellant's motion for a speedy trial under the 6th Amendment and Article 2, Section 24 of the Arizona Constitution

QUESTIONS PRESENTED ___ CA) pp THe wad couar abuse sf prscreTion woour(alfidavt) when's} combed _=__Appellanks sail Beyond THE LientTS set lorlh ule 6.2 Leading case, Such ___ that A ppel lars 5 Speedy 7hial nghts. Pursuant To-THE Li” Amendenentt To THE US. ConST arenes ant. 2.9.44 of She 2 ___ (9) Tne tw poetaNT QUESTION FOR TREATIES FoR"TM\S CouRT To DECIDE TE Roos. Superior Cone ol” maRicops cout soo atiz. 3eul8H*)-T 5 __ THE AMIZ.CONST PuBUISHEDos prachite ___m fhe STATE OF ARIZONA_WHHY THE COURT OF Appeals MEMORANDUM —_ = DECISION overlooked sw_conl hel wilh TREATIES LAWNS Srare v. Vasko 198 api2Iare 9) sare v. Senile 190 miz.ial 9) fk pole BQ (3) pairona_suieson coum Rule 1.2 these rule s_ore_intenided to provide forthe ———___ _ of. every criminal proceedaig. they shall be construed 4to-seeure Samplicshy in —_protedure elmmattion cf umecesearydel ay _tnid_egponse, ond to_pevte d she Lundomentol right of ~__preserwing the_puleie wel ore