October Term 2009 · Docket 08-728
Does pretrial motion preparation time count toward the Speedy Trial Act deadline?
The dispute centers on whether time spent preparing pretrial motions automatically stops the Speedy Trial Act clock.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
the side that brought the case argues that Section 3161(h)(1) does not cover motion preparation time.
the side that brought the case claims that only Section 3161(h)(7) allows case-by-case exclusions.
The government argues that Section 3161(h)(1) automatically excludes this time.
The government claims that delay from other proceedings includes motion preparation.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 31-51 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 31-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-13
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
The Speedy Trial Act sets strict deadlines for federal criminal trials. Section 3161(h)(1) excludes delay from other proceedings. Section 3161(h)(7) allows case-by-case exclusions. The parties disagree on which section applies to motion preparation time.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on October 6, 2009.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case wants the Court to reject automatic exclusion of motion preparation time.
The government wants the Court to uphold automatic exclusion of motion preparation time.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that Section 3161(h)(1) does not automatically exclude motion preparation time.
The government argues that Section 3161(h)(1) automatically excludes motion preparation time.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
What the justices asked
Justice Ginsburg asked when the judge could make an interest of justice filing.
Justice Sotomayor asked if Congress only considered the hearing and motion filing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 31-51 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 31-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-13
Why it matters
This case defines how federal courts calculate trial deadlines. It affects the balance between speedy trials and thorough preparation. It clarifies the scope of statutory exclusions for all federal criminal cases.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 29-37 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 29-37
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 10, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 10, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 12, lines 19-33 — Transcript, file page 12, lines 19-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 3-13 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 3-13
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 41-49 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 41-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 47-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 47-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 25-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 25-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 47-49 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 47-49
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 13-31 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 13-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 17-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 17-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 31-51 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 31-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 5-13 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 5-13
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 26, lines 47-31 — Transcript, file page 26, lines 47-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-51 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-51
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.