In the case of Idaho v. Lori Vallow Daybell, Daybell's attorney's filed a request to dismiss the case on the grounds that the court violated her 6th amendment rights to a speedy trial.

The state has filed an objection to the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of a speedy trial. The state cites, among other reasons, the several extenuating factors brought up by the defendant herself that has caused the delay in reaching trial. The defendant asked for a change of venue, to Ada County, hundreds of miles from the originating venue. The defendant also underwent several examinations for mental health fitness to stand trial, all of which effectively pause the timeline on the right to a speedy trial.

The state calculates that by supreme court precedent, including delays and motions, the right to a speedy trial standard would put the trial on or around February 18, 2023. For the trial to take place 44 days beyond that is not presumptively prejudicial under a Constitutional analysis for any reason.

The motion concludes; "so, adding forty-four days beyond the statutory time period, and allowing the Court to make necessary arrangements to try the matter in another jurisdiction hundreds of miles from the originating county, at the Request of the Defendant, with a case of this complexity is reasonable. The Court should find there has been no violation of the Defendant’s right to a speedy trial. Therefore, the State respectfully requests the Court deny the Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Speedy Trial."