In the 1982 case of Alabama v. Evans, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in favor of respondent Evans. The state of Alabama had sought to prosecute Evans for a crime committed while he was on parole from an earlier conviction. However, due to procedural errors and delays by officials in obtaining custody over him from federal authorities (where he was serving time for another offense), his trial did not commence within the stipulated period as per Alabama's Speedy Trial Act. This act mandates that trials must begin within 180 days after arrest or indictment unless certain exceptions apply. The State argued that this delay should be excused because it resulted from bureaucratic miscommunication between state and federal agencies rather than deliberate action by prosecutors; however, this argument was rejected both at trial court level and upon appeal to higher courts including finally, SCOTUS which upheld lower courts' decisions dismissing charges against Mr.Evans based on violation of speedy trial provisions under state law.

In the dissenting opinion for Alabama v. Evans, Justice Stevens argued that the majority's decision to reverse and remand was premature and unnecessary. He contended that there were unresolved issues in the case which could have been addressed by lower courts before reaching the Supreme Court. Specifically, he pointed out that it was unclear whether or not a new trial would be granted if certain evidence had been excluded from consideration during jury deliberation. Furthermore, he disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Chapman v. California (1967), arguing instead that any constitutional error should be considered harmless only if it is clear beyond reasonable doubt that it did not contribute to a defendant’s conviction or sentence.