Scotty Wilson was convicted of armed robbery, burglary, and firearm offenses, but his motion for a new trial remained unresolved for nearly fourteen years after it was filed. The Court of Appeals called the delay inexcusable and warned that prolonged post-conviction proceedings threaten the rights of defendants and victims and the validity of convictions. The court nevertheless affirmed some portions of the trial court’s order, vacated the portion declining to decide the general grounds of the new-trial motion, and remanded for that decision. The court held that counsel’s failure to file a brief on specified hearsay issues abandoned further argument on those issues, not the entire motion. The trial court therefore had to consider whether the evidence was legally sufficient under the proper standard. The decision is notable for its institutional admonition about appellate delay and for separating abandonment of particular arguments from abandonment of a pending new-trial motion.