Court to Hear Speedy Trial Act Case

On Friday, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Zedner v. United States (05-5992). The questions presented by the case are: (1) whether and under what standard may a defendant waive his Speedy Trial Act right to be tried within 70 days of his indictment and (2) whether the Act’s 70-day time limit for bringing an accused to trial is subject to harmless-error analysis.

In Zedner, the defendant challenged two periods of time as violations of his rights under the Speedy Trial Act. The first period presents the question of whether and when a defendant’s waiver of his Speedy Trial Act rights is effective, a question on which the circuits follow different standards. The First and Seventh Circuits almost always recognize a defendant’s waiver, whereas the Fifth Circuit places the onus on district courts to ensure that waivers fall within one of the Act’s written exceptions. The Fourth Circuit follows an intermediate rule. The Second Circuit, reasoning its way through the conflicting authorities, held, “At the very least, when a defendant requests an adjournment that would serve the ends of justice, that defendant will not be heard to claim that her Speedy Trial rights were violated by the court’s grant of her request.” As such, because the defendant requested the delay and the delay would have fallen within the ends of justice, his Speedy Trial Act rights were not violated.

The second period presents the harmless-error question. During this time, Zedner’s attorney was unavailable due to complications from pregnancy. Furthermore, Zedner himself was incompetent to stand trial. Both of those facts would have permitted delay under the Act. However, the district court made no record that the delay “resulted from” Zedner’s incompetence or from his attorney’s unavailability. Consequently, according to the Second Circuit, the District Judge may have technically violated the Act. However, the Court held that, because the defendant could not have been tried anyway, the error was harmless, and the Act was not violated.

The Court granted certiorari to resolve the split among the circuits as to when a defendant’s Speedy Trial Act waiver is effective and whether harmless-error analysis applies in the Speedy Trial Act context. The case will be argued in April.

A discussion of the Second Circuit case can be found
here.

The Solicitor General’s Brief in Opposition to Certiorari can be found
here.