What Is Speedy Trial in Federal Court
The Speedy Trial Act promises you trial within 70 days of indictment. That sounds protective. It sounds like a hard deadline that keeps the government honest. But here's what practitioners know that most people searching this question at midnight don't: in Zedner v. United States, a defendant waited MORE THAN SEVEN YEARS for his federal trial - and nobody violated the Act. The 70-day clock stopped, restarted, stopped again. By the time the Supreme Court heard his case, the "speedy trial" had become a seven-year marathon of legal limbo.
You have two speedy trial rights in federal court. The Sixth Amendment gives you a constitutional right to speedy trial, but it comes with no fixed deadline - courts use a vague four-factor balancing test from Barker v. Wingo. The Speedy Trial Act of 1974 provides the actual 70-day deadline, but it comes with so many "excludable time" categories that the deadline is mostly fiction. So you have two speedy trial protections, and neither one actualy guarantees speed.
Welcome to Spodek Law Group. We understand you're probably searching for answers during one of the scariest times of your life - facing federal charges, wondering how long this will drag on, trying to figure out if theres some rule that protects you. There is. Sort of. This article explains how speedy trial really works in federal court, why the 70-day promise almost never means 70 days, and what it means for your case.
The 70-Day Promise and Why It Almost Never Applies
The Speedy Trial Act is codified at 18 U.S.C. Section 3161. The basic framework looks simple: the government has 30 days from arrest to file an indictment, then trial must begin within 70 days after indictment or initial apperance, whichever comes later. Theres also protection going the other direction - trial can't begin LESS than 30 days after arraignment unless you agree in writing. So the window is 30 to 70 days. Seems straightforward. Its not.
The Act contains a massive list of "excludable time" periods - events that stop the 70-day clock without violating the law. In Henderson v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that time is excluded for ALL periods when a pretrial motion is pending, from the moment of filing until the court resolves it. Whether or not that motion actualy delays trial. Whether or not the court takes three months to rule on a routine administrative matter. The clock stops. And heres what makes it worse: your defense motions count too. The motion to suppress evidence that might win your case? It just added months to your wait. The competency evaluation you need? Another few months excluded.
Excludable time categories include:
- Mental competency or physical examinations of the defendant
- ALL pretrial motions, from filing through resolution
- Delays caused by co-defendants (their motions affect your clock)
- "Ends of justice" continuances granted by the court
- Interlocutory appeals
- Absence or unavailability of essential witnesses
- Time when defendant is fleeing or avoiding apprehension
- Deferred prosecution agreements
- Time to transfer cases between districts
The "ends of justice" category is the biggest loophole. The court can grant a continuance whenever it finds that the "ends of justice" outweigh the public and defendant interest in speedy trial. In theory, the judge must make specific findings on the record. In practice, complexity of the case, need for preparation time, and continuity of counsel all count. The judge checks a box, makes a finding, and your 70 days becomes 270 days. The Act was designed to protect the PUBLIC interest in speedy justice - not just yours - which means even if you want to move fast, the system can slow you down.
Your Defense Strategy Stops Your Own Clock
Heres the uncomfortable truth that most articles about speedy trial wont tell you: everything you do to defend yourself delays your speedy trial. File a motion. Clock stops. Request time to review discovery. Clock stops. Need a competency evaluation. Clock stops. Ask for a continuance to prepare for trial. Clock stops. The very actions that might help you win are the actions that keep you waiting.
This is how it works proceduraly. When you or your attorney files any pretrial motion - suppression motion, motion to dismiss, motion for discovery, anything - the speedy trial clock pauses from the moment of filing until the court issues its ruling. Even if the court takes months to schedule a hearing. Even if the delay has nothing to do with the motion's substance. Even if you filed a simple administrative request that could be resolved in a day. The Supreme Court in Henderson made clear that the excludable period covers "all time between the filing of a motion and the conclusion of the hearing on that motion, whether or not a delay in holding that hearing is 'reasonably necessary.'"
Consider what happened to Jacob Zedner. Arrested in 1996 for trying to open bank accounts using a fake $10 million bond from the fictitious "Ministry of Finance of U.S.A." The district court had difficulty scheduling his trial. The judge - the JUDGE - suggested that Zedner waive his speedy trial rights "for all time." Zedner signed the form. Trial didn't begin until more then seven years after his indictment. The Supreme Court eventually ruled that prospective waivers like this are invalid - you cant sign away your rights before a violation occurs. But by then, Zedner had spent seven years waiting. And heres the thing about retrospective waivers: those ARE allowed. If you sign a continuance form after the fact, you've waived.
We get it. This probly feels like a system designed to work against you. The rules were suppose to protect defendants from the government dragging cases out indefinitely. But the excludable time categories have grown so expansive that they swallow the protection. Filing motions to defend yourself - which is litteraly what your attorney should be doing - delays your right to speedy trial. Requesting time to prepare - which is how cases are won - delays your right to speedy trial. Its like being told you have a right to something, but exercising any other right makes that first right disappear.
When the Clock Runs Out - And You Still Lose
So what happens if the speedy trial clock actualy runs out? You get to move for dismissal. Sounds like you win. Except dismissal under the Speedy Trial Act can be WITH or WITHOUT prejudice. Dismissal with prejudice means its over - the government cannot re-file charges against you for the same conduct. Dismissal without prejudice means the government can re-indict you tomorrow and start the whole 70-day clock all over again. Your "speedy trial violation" becomes a minor procedural inconvienence for prosecutors, not freedom for you.
Courts decide between with and without prejudice by weighing several factors. The seriousness of the offense. The facts and circumstances leading to dismissal. The impact of re-prosecution on the administration of justice. For serious federal crimes - the kind most defendants face - courts lean heavily toward dismissal WITHOUT prejudice. In United States v. Murta (5th Circuit, 2024), the court affirmed a speedy trial violation but remanded specifically for the judge to determine whether dismissal should be with or without prejudice. The violation was clear. Freedom was not.
And heres the inversion that catches people off guard: demanding your speedy trial can backfire catastrophicly. If you force trial within 70 days, your attorney might not have time to review tens of thousands of pages of discovery. Might not have time to investigate witnesses. Might not have time to prepare expert testimony or develop a defense strategy. You rush to trial unprepared, and you lose. "I won my speedy trial motion" is cold comfort when you're serving a federal sentence. The strategic question isn't whether you have a speedy trial right. Its whether exercising that right helps or hurts your defense.
If your facing federal charges and wondering about timing, about how long your case will take, about whether speedy trial is a real option - Todd Spodek has handled federal cases where speedy trial was a genuine defense strategy. And cases where waiving was the smart play. The answer depends entirely on your specific situation: the strength of the evidence, the complexity of the case, how much discovery needs review, whether you're in custody or on bail.
Spodek Law Group offers consultations for people facing federal charges. The consultation is free. The advice is honest. Call 212-300-5196. Because understanding how speedy trial actualy works - not how it sounds like it should work - could change everything about how you approach your case. Were here when your ready.
