Speedy Trial Motions

Speedy Trial Motions

When a defendant is charged with a crime, they have a constitutional right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment. This means the government can’t indefinitely delay prosecuting someone – the trial needs to start within a reasonable time frame. However, determining what’s “reasonable” can get complicated in practice.

That’s where speedy trial motions come in. These are requests made by the defense to dismiss the case if the defendant’s right to a speedy trial has been violated. Speedy trial motions are an important protection for defendants against lengthy delays before trial. But they can also be controversial if prosecutors feel the delays were justified.

The Legal Basis for Speedy Trials

The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that “In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial.” [1] The Founding Fathers recognized that lengthy delays before trial can be unfair and make it harder for the defense to mount their case. Defendants may languish in jail for a long time pre-trial if they can’t afford bail. Witnesses’ memories can fade, making testimony less reliable. And the cloud of unresolved charges takes a toll on the accused and their family.

The Supreme Court laid out a balancing test for speedy trial rights in Barker v. Wingo. Courts weigh four factors: the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, whether the defendant asserted their speedy trial right, and any prejudice to the defendant. [3] This flexible standard gives judges discretion in evaluating speedy trial claims. But it also provides the basis for defendants to challenge unreasonable delays through speedy trial motions.

Statutory Speedy Trial Requirements

In addition to the constitutional right to a speedy trial, many states and the federal government have passed statutes mandating specific speedy trial deadlines. At the federal level, the Speedy Trial Act of 1974 requires that trials start within 70 days of a defendant’s initial appearance, with certain exclusions. [2] States often have similar statutory requirements dictating a trial must begin within a certain number of days or months. [5]

These speedy trial statutes reinforce defendants’ constitutional rights. They provide clearer deadlines for when a trial delay becomes a violation. However, the statutes also spell out exceptions where certain delays don’t count against the speedy trial clock. Common exceptions are delays caused by the defense, delays for competency evaluations, and delays where the court finds the case is complex and needs more time. [2]

Making a Speedy Trial Motion

If the time limits under the Sixth Amendment or a speedy trial statute have been exceeded, the defense can file a motion to dismiss the charges. The motion argues that the defendant’s right to a speedy trial has been violated by the delays in getting to trial. This asks the court to uphold the defendant’s rights by dismissing the case.

In the motion, the defense will explain how long the total delay has been and argue why it’s unreasonable under the circumstances. They’ll point out any delays caused by prosecutorial negligence or actions within the state’s control. The defense may also emphasize any specific prejudice the defendant has suffered from not having a speedy trial.

The prosecution will get a chance to respond to the motion and justify any delays. They may argue certain periods don’t count toward speedy trial calculations due to exceptions in the statutes. Prosecutors can also rebut claims of negligence and emphasize any delays caused by the defense. [6]

The judge will then weigh these arguments and decide if dismissing the charges is the appropriate remedy for the speedy trial violation. Dismissal is a drastic step that allows a potentially guilty person to go free. So judges may consider if there are other solutions, like releasing the defendant from pretrial detention.

Pandemic Impacts on Speedy Trials

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a huge impact on speedy trial rights across the country. Courts were forced to postpone many criminal trials for public health reasons. But these delays of months or even years have jeopardized defendants’ constitutional and statutory speedy trial protections.

In response, some federal courts and states tolled or suspended their speedy trial statutes during the pandemic. This stopped the speedy trial clock from running during court shutdowns and delays. However, defense attorneys have argued these tolling orders violate defendants’ rights. They say the pandemic doesn’t eliminate speedy trial protections. [4]

Many judges rejected pandemic tolling orders. They acknowledged COVID-19 created unavoidable delays. But they held the state still had a duty to bring defendants to trial within a reasonable time frame. This has led to a flood of pandemic-related speedy trial motions as courts work through huge backlogs of criminal cases.

Weighing the Interests at Stake

Speedy trial motions require balancing important interests on both sides. On one hand, lengthy trial delays undermine core principles of justice. Defendants have a right to mount an effective defense instead of having charges hanging over them indefinitely.

But on the other hand, setting defendants free without a trial frustrates victims and the public interest. Dismissals allow people accused of serious crimes to escape accountability. Prosecutors argue some complex cases require more pretrial time to build an effective case.

There are also important interests around public health and safety. For example, courts had to delay trials during the pandemic to avoid spreading the virus. And prosecutors may need more preparation time if a key witness falls ill.

Judges have the difficult task of weighing all these competing concerns. The ultimate goal is to strike a balance and protect both defendants’ rights and the integrity of the justice system. Speedy trial motions are a key tool for defendants to push courts to uphold their constitutional rights when delays become excessive.

The Bottom Line

The right to a speedy trial is a vital constitutional protection for defendants. But the COVID-19 pandemic has strained the criminal justice system’s ability to provide speedy trials. This has led to contentious legal battles over extending speedy trial deadlines versus upholding defendants’ rights.

Going forward, courts will likely see a flood of speedy trial motions from defendants seeking dismissals after lengthy pandemic delays. These motions offer an important remedy when the state fails to prosecute cases within a reasonable timeframe. However, judges will need to carefully balance the competing interests at stake in deciding whether dismissal is warranted in each case.

References

[1] Sixth Amendment, Legal Information Institute

[2] 18 U.S. Code § 3161 – Time limits and exclusions, Legal Information Institute

[3] Sixth Amendment Right to a Speedy Trial, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces

[4] Problems With Tolling The Speedy Trial Act During Pandemic, Winston & Strawn LLP

[5] Motions Bank, Public Defender Services – WV.gov

[6] Speedy Trial, American Bar Association