Judge Weighs Speedy Trial Dismissal in 2018 Buncombe Child Exploitation Case

A Buncombe County Superior Court judge is considering whether to dismiss a 2018 child‑exploitation indictment against Robin Dale Jordan, 68, a retired occupational therapist, after defense attorney Jack Stewart filed a motion alleging an "intentional and willful violation" of Jordan's constitutional right to a speedy trial. Jordan was indicted and arrested in September 2018 on 20 counts of third‑degree sexual exploitation of a minor, court records show.

Stewart says the investigation began when North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation agents sourced information they believed led to Jordan's IP address and seized his electronic devices under a search warrant in February 2018. The seizure preceded the September 2018 indictment by several months, and copies of the indictments describe graphic sexual images of prepubescent girls as young as two years old, including allegations that some images depicted bound children or involved animals.

Assistant District Attorney Blair Barker is the prosecutor assigned to the case. Stewart told court officials that Barker called him "last August" and, according to Stewart, made a plea offer that Stewart said was the "first time he can recall that a plea offer was made in the case." Stewart said he raised the speedy‑trial issue during that call, and, in September, Stewart filed the motion to dismiss asserting the constitutional claim.

The motion comes "over seven years later" from the original indictment and arrest, a timing Stewart uses to frame the speedy‑trial argument. The defense motion invokes the right to a speedy trial as required under both the United States Constitution and the Constitution of North Carolina; the filings characterize the post‑indictment delays as deliberate enough to warrant dismissal. The motion's text and any prosecution response have not yet been made public in court filings accessible to this reporter.

Several key procedural details remain unreported in the current record. Court filings available to date do not identify the presiding Buncombe County Superior Court judge handling the motion, do not state the exact calendar date the motion to dismiss was filed, and do not disclose whether Jordan has remained in custody since the 2018 arrest or was released on bond. The prosecution's formal response to Stewart's speedy‑trial claim, if filed, was not referenced in the motion summary provided to the court.

The judge's forthcoming decision will determine whether the 20 third‑degree sexual exploitation counts proceed to trial or are dismissed on speedy‑trial grounds. The indictments allege particularly serious images and victims as young as two, and the court docket entries and filings will be the next documents to clarify timelines, the scope of discovery, and the prosecution's position on the asserted delays.