U.S. Code » Title 18 » Part PART II— CRIMINAL PROCEDURE › Chapter CHAPTER 208— SPEEDY TRIAL

18 U.S.C. § 3165

District plans—generally

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Each district court shall conduct a continuing study of the administration of criminal justice in the district court and before United States magistrate judges of the district and shall prepare plans for the disposition of criminal cases in accordance with this chapter. Each such plan shall be formulated after consultation with, and after considering the recommendations of, the Federal Judicial Center and the planning group established for that district pursuant to section 3168. The plans shall be prepared in accordance with the schedule set forth in subsection (e) of this section.(b) The planning and implementation process shall seek to accelerate the disposition of criminal cases in the district consistent with the time standards of this chapter and the objectives of effective law enforcement, fairness to accused persons, efficient judicial administration, and increased knowledge concerning the proper functioning of the criminal law. The process shall seek to avoid underenforcement, overenforcement and discriminatory enforcement of the law, prejudice to the prompt disposition of civil litigation, and undue pressure as well as undue delay in the trial of criminal cases.(c) The plans prepared by each district court shall be submitted for approval to a reviewing panel consisting of the members of the judicial council of the circuit and either the chief judge of the district court whose plan is being reviewed or such other active judge of that court as the chief judge of that district court may designate. If approved by the reviewing panel, the plan shall be forwarded to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, which office shall report annually on the operation of such plans to the Judicial Conference of the United States.(d) The district court may modify the plan at any time with the approval of the reviewing panel. It shall modify the plan when directed to do so by the reviewing panel or the Judicial Conference of the United States. Modifications shall be reported to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts.(e)(1) Prior to the expiration of the twelve-calendar-month period following July 1, 1975, each United States district court shall prepare and submit a plan in accordance with subsections (a) through (d) above to govern the trial or other disposition of offenses within the jurisdiction of such court during the second and third twelve-calendar-month periods following the effective date of subsection 3161(b) and subsection 3161(c).(2) Prior to the expiration of the thirty-six calendar month period following July 1, 1975, each United States district court shall prepare and submit a plan in accordance with subsections (a) through (d) above to govern the trial or other disposition of offenses within the jurisdiction of such court during the fourth and fifth twelve-calendar-month periods following the effective date of subsection 3161(b) and subsection 3161(c).(3) Not later than June 30, 1980, each United States district court with respect to which implementation has not been ordered under section 3174(c) shall prepare and submit a plan in accordance with subsections (a) through (d) to govern the trial or other disposition of offenses within the jurisdiction of such court during the sixth and subsequent twelve-calendar-month periods following the effective date of subsection 3161(b) and subsection 3161(c) in effect prior to the date of enactment of this paragraph.(f) Plans adopted pursuant to this section shall, upon adoption, and recommendations of the district planning group shall, upon completion, become public documents.(Added Pub. L. 93–619, title I, § 101, Jan. 3, 1975, 88 Stat. 2081; amended Pub. L. 96–43, § 8, Aug. 2, 1979, 93 Stat. 329; Pub. L. 101–647, title XXXV, § 3577, Nov. 29, 1990, 104 Stat. 4929; Pub. L. 101–650, title III, § 321, Dec. 1, 1990, 104 Stat. 5117.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

For the effective date of subsection 3161(b) and subsection 3161(c) in effect prior to the date of enactment of this paragraph, referred to in subsec. (e), see section 3163(a) and (b) of this title. The date of enactment of par. (3) of subsec. (e) of this section is the date of enactment of Pub. L. 96–43, which was approved Aug. 2, 1979. Subsecs. (a) and (b) of section 3163 of this title were not amended by Pub. L. 96–43.

Amendments

1990—Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 101–647 substituted “twelve-calendar-month” for “twelve-calendar month”.

1979—Subsec. (e)(2). Pub. L. 96–43, § 8(1), substituted “fifth twelve-calendar” for “subsequent twelve-calendar”.

Subsec. (e)(3). Pub. L. 96–43, § 8(2), added par. (3).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesChange of Name

“United States magistrate judges” substituted for “United States magistrates” in subsec. (a) pursuant to section 321 of Pub. L. 101–650, set out as a note under section 631 of Title 28, Judiciary and Judicial Procedure.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases, 1976–2019 · leading case: United States v. Harold Thomas Wilson, United States of America v. Bobby Eugene Hendrix
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Harold Thomas Wilson, United States of America v. Bobby Eugene Hendrix (1981) ca5 · cites it 2× “at § 3163(c), Wilson’s statutory claim in effect arises not under the Speedy Trial Act, but under the transitional plan adopted by the Northern District of Texas during the interim period before the effective date of the sanction provisions.”
United States v. Albert E. Mills. United States of America v. Kenneth B. Wonson (1992) cadc · cites it 2× “District Court for the District of Columbia (shortly after the Act’s passage) when it promulgated a speedy trial plan in accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 3165 . Section 4 of the plan implements § 3161(b) and specifically provides that: A charge of violation of the District of…”
United States v. Judith Ann Krynicki (1982) ca1 “Congress intended such plans, which district courts have adopted pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 3165 --66, to “accelerate the disposition of criminal cases .”
United States v. Gregory Donnell Stafford, United States of America v. George Graham (1983) ca11 “The Southern District of Florida’s District Plan, adopted pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3165 (e)(3), expressly incorporates these exclusions.”
United States v. Gonzalo Gonzalez (1982) ca11 “We also note that the “Plan for Prompt Disposition of Criminal Cases,” United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, promulgated pursuant to the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3165 (e)(3), specifically states that a jury trial commences at the beginning of…”
United States v. Scott David Lattany (1993) ca3 “Plan for prompt disposition of criminal cases, pursuant to Speedy Trial Act of 1974 — 18 U.S.C.A. § 3165 (e)(3), United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, at 16 (emphasis in original).”
United States v. Raoul Barrie Clymer (1994) ca9 “Second, where a particular period of pretrial motion delay violates or is rendered non-excludable by a district court’s plan for achieving the prompt disposition of criminal cases, implemented as required by 18 U.S.C. § 3165 and Fed.R.Crim.P. 50(b), that period of delay will not…”
United States v. Walter Metz and Ronald D. Schiller (1980) ca5 “18 U.S.C. § 3165 (e)(2) (1976). Replacing that plan was another plan filed on June 20, 1978, and effective since July 1, 1979.”
United States v. Donald Hillegas (1978) ca2 “§ 3731 from dismissal of an indictment raises the question of whether, under the Interim Statement of Time Limits and Procedures for Achieving Prompt Disposition of Criminal Cases (the “Current Plan”), which was adopted by the Southern District of New York effective July 1,…”
United States v. John Stayton, A/K/A \John Gallagher\"" (1986) ca2 “In addition, the Plan for Prompt Disposition of Criminal Cases in effect in the Western District of New York, which has been approved by the Second Circuit Judicial Council pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3165 (c), provides that “[a] trial in a jury case shall be deemed to commence at…”
United States v. Anthony Campisi, Peter S. Campisi, Peter A. Campisi, Carman Charles Campisi. Appeal of Peter A. Campisi (1978) ca3 “See 18 U.S.C. § 3165 . Section II(7)(a) of the New Jersey Plan provides in relevant part that “a defendant shall ordinarily be sentenced within 45 days of the date of his conviction or plea of guilty or nolo contendere.”
United States v. Fred Hill (1980) ca5 “Until the FSTA sanctions do activate, we look to the interim plan of each district, adopted pursuant to 18 U.S. C.A. § 3165 (West Supp.1980) and Fed.”
Show all 35 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.