The case, State of Alabama v. Kharon Torchec Davis, underscores how the country’s justice system can flounder at many levels, especially for poor defendants. And it exposes the loopholes in the constitutional protections that are supposed to ensure that both the victims and the accused receive timely justice.

In capital murder cases, in which the defendant faces the death penalty, it is not unusual to spend two or three years behind bars awaiting trial if the defendant is not granted bail or is unable to afford it. But a decade is extreme. Mr. Davis’s wait is among the most protracted that The New York Times could find.

Mr. Davis’s case has suffered from misplaced evidence, conflicts of interest, and restrictions on his ability to review his own legal documents in jail, according to interviews and a review of his case file. His lawyers and prosecutors share the blame for the delay, as does Mr. Davis himself. At a hearing early last year, for instance, Mr. Davis insisted on replacing his second team of court-appointed lawyers, saying he did not trust them, even though the judge warned that doing so would further delay his trial.

“It is impossible to look at it,” said Jonathan Turley, a constitutional law expert at George Washington University, of the case, “and not find it deeply, deeply troubling.”

Mr. Davis maintains he is innocent and has declined offers of a plea deal. In February, after the election of a new district attorney who had a conflict of interest, the state attorney general took over the prosecution and dropped pursuit of the death penalty. Jury selection in the trial finally began on Monday.