Jury selection is expected to begin May 31 in the hate crime case against an Annapolis man charged with killing three people and wounding three others earlier this year.

On Thursday, Charles Robert Smith waived what is commonly referred to as the “Hicks rule” — a defendant’s right to a speedy trial. In Maryland, unless given good cause, a criminal trial in Circuit Court must occur within 180 days of the defendant’s first appearance in court or after a defense attorney is entered into the case.

Citing the complex nature of the case — which already involves troves of written and video evidence and may include input from federal investigators — county prosecutors and public defenders agreed to push what would have been a January trial to late May and the first half of June. Anne Arundel County State’s Attorney Anne Colt Leitess will be lead prosecutor in the case, her second since successfully obtaining a conviction two years ago for the shooter in the Capital Gazette newsroom attack.

The court dates were not confirmed during Thursday’s hearing before Anne Arundel Circuit Judge Donna Schaeffer, though Assistant State’s Attorney Jason Steinhardt, who is trying the case with Leitess, said they were mutually agreed to. Anne Arundel Circuit Judge J. Michael Wachs, who will preside over the case, is expected to issue an order solidifying a two-week trial schedule.

On June 11, Smith, 43, shot and killed three people outside his mother’s house in Annapolis and wounded three others, police say. The shooting, the largest instance of mass violence in Annapolis in nearly five years, stemmed from an argument between neighbors.

According to charging documents, 12 minutes before Smith was arrested at his front door with his hands in the air, his mother, Shirley Smith, called a city parking employee and complained that a car was blocking her driveway.

The six people shot were part of a larger group celebrating a birthday party three doors down from the Smith house. Police said Mario Mireles, the first person shot and killed, approached the mother after the complaint and an argument ensued. When Smith came home, police said the confrontation became physical and then fatal. Smith pulled a handgun during the fight and killed Mireles, 27, and Christian Segovia, 25, a guest at the party, police said.

According to charging documents, Smith “stood over Mireles and shot him several more times.”

When other members of the party came outside and saw Mireles and Segovia on the ground, they ran over to help. Smith went inside his house, picked up a rifle and began firing out the front window, killing Nicholas Mireles, Mireles’ 55-year-old father, and striking three others, according to charging documents. In addition to those who were killed or wounded, three more were “assaulted, but uninjured,” prosecutors said.

Police did not identify the specific types of firearms used in the shooting.

The shooting brought national attention to Annapolis, where public officials were quick to condemn the violence and thank both first responders and federal investigators — who analyzed the Paddington Place crime scene for several days.

Smith was initially charged on 10 counts. A month later, a grand jury indicted him on 42 charges, including three hate crimes, finding the deaths of Segovia, Mario Mireles and Nicholas Mireles were “motivated in substantial part” by their national origin.

Court records showed the Paddington Place shooting was preceded by years of strife between the Smith and Mireles family.

In 2016, Mario Mireles, who grew up on Paddington Place with his mother, and Shirley Smith each filed peace order petitions against the other. He accused her of years of racist behavior and accused her of targeting him with her car. In her complaint, Smith accused Mireles of swatting her car with some kind of cloth and throwing rocks at street signs, which hit nearby vehicles. Both peace orders were dismissed by a judge who ruled neither met the necessary burden of proof.

Mario Mireles’ widow, Judi Abundez, reiterated the 2016 accusation and called the shooting a hate crime weeks before the indictment.

Smith’s attorneys, Anne Stewart-Hill and Denis O’Connell, declined to comment.

While little is known about Smith’s defense, in the months since the shooting, court documents have shed some light on the evidence that may be used in trial. In an Aug. 29 consent motion, Leitess asked that possession of “sensitive, graphic” evidence be restricted only to the attorneys involved. In it, she wrote that the state has compiled more than 130 video interviews and over 340 crime scene photographs, as well as several police and fire department reports and 911 call data.

The motion also refers to audio files of calls made by Smith and his mother, one being the parking complaint and the other a “mailbox damage complaint.”

An Annapolis Police spokesperson said Wednesday that they were “not aware of any conversation” regarding a mailbox and referred comment to the state’s attorney’s office, which did not respond to a question about the audio evidence.

Smith’s trial may also involve evidence analyzed by federal agencies, including the FBI, the Drug Enforcement Agency and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, all of which responded to Annapolis in June.

At the time of his arrest, Smith told police he “shot the people because they shot at his house,” according to charging documents. Though no witnesses reported seeing anyone else with a gun, four bullet holes were visible on the Smiths’ home. During a June 12 news conference, Annapolis Police Chief Ed Jackson said his department initially “speculated” there was an “exchange of gunfire,” clarifying once federal investigators stepped in, “that’s yet to be determined.”

No other arrests were made in the June 11 shooting.

Motion hearings in Smith’s case are also expected to be scheduled for April 9 and April 16, Steinhardt said Thursday.