Speedy Trial Clock and a Client Who Refuses a Continuance
Marcus Hale has been in federal custody since his arrest on January 8. A grand jury indicted him on February 2, and he was arraigned on February 10, when trial was set for April 15. On March 20, defense counsel filed a motion to suppress Hale’s post-arrest statements. The court scheduled a hearing for April 2 but has not ruled. On April 8, the prosecutor disclosed a new DNA lab report and a supplemental expert notice. Defense counsel wants to continue trial to May 20 to review the DNA and prepare a rebuttal expert. Hale insists on going to trial on April 15 and refuses to consent to any continuance. Assume this hypothetical jurisdiction has adopted a 70-day speedy-trial rule measured from arraignment, excluding time during pending pretrial motions and any continuance granted in the interest of justice. The local rule requires expert notices 21 days before trial. The paralegal must advise counsel on the clock and the continuance request.
1. Calculate the speedy-trial days elapsed as of April 8. Which periods are excluded, and what is the latest trial date if the court grants the May 20 continuance?
Read the worked answer
Treat the day after arraignment as the first counted day unless local practice says otherwise. From February 11 through March 20 is 38 countable days. The suppression motion was filed March 20 and remains pending, so March 20 through April 8 is excluded; that is 19 days, but they do not add to the 38. As of April 8, the clock therefore stands at 38 days, not 57. If the court rules on April 8 and no continuance is granted, 32 days remain, making May 10 the outside trial date. The April 15 trial date is timely. If the court grants the May 20 continuance, the April 9–May 20 period is 42 days. Adding 42 to 38 produces 80 days, which exceeds the 70-day limit unless the court expressly excludes the continuance period in the interest of justice. The motion must ask the court to make that finding and to state the excludable time in the order. Separately, the 21-day expert-notice deadline for an April 15 trial was March 25, so the April 8 supplemental notice is untimely; for a May 20 trial, the deadline would be April 29.
2. Hale refuses to consent to a continuance. Can the court grant one over his objection, and what should counsel file to protect the record?
Read the worked answer
Yes. A defendant’s speedy-trial demand is not absolute, and a court may grant a continuance over the defendant’s objection when the need for a fair trial and effective preparation outweighs the defendant’s interest in the scheduled date, provided the court makes findings on the record. The new DNA report and the need for a rebuttal expert are strong grounds, especially because the prosecution’s supplemental expert notice is late. Counsel should not file a purported waiver of speedy trial signed only by counsel if the client refuses; that misstates the client’s position. Instead, counsel should file a written motion for continuance that recites the April 8 disclosure, the expert-notice deadline, the need to review raw data and retain a rebuttal expert, the proposed May 20 date, and the specific excludable period requested. Counsel should attach a proposed order with findings, note the client’s objection on the record, and request a hearing. The paralegal should prepare a chronology and a client letter documenting that the client was told the trial date may be lost and that the objection will be preserved.
3. What should the paralegal do about the late expert notice in the meantime?
Read the worked answer
First calculate both deadlines: March 25 for the original April 15 date and April 29 for May 20. Then prepare a short motion or objection that preserves the defense position if the continuance is denied: the prosecution did not give 21 days’ notice, so the examiner should be excluded or allowed only on terms that permit meaningful rebuttal. At the same time, request the lab’s complete file, raw data, chain-of-custody records, bench notes, and the examiner’s CV. The paralegal should open a deadline calendar, obtain a rebuttal expert’s availability for both trial dates, and draft a proposed order that alternates between exclusion and a short continuance. Do not assume the DNA report helps or hurts the defense; the report may be inculpatory or ambiguous. The practical goal is to give counsel a record for either outcome: exclusion if the court keeps April 15, or an excludable continuance if the court moves the date.