State v. Garcia-Moronta & State v. Reyes-Rodriguez

Amicus briefs arguing that the delay in trying a defendant caused by their detention by ICE or deportation should count against the State in a speedy trial analysis when the State has failed to take reasonable steps to effectuate the defendant’s appearance for their criminal proceedings.

ICE often detains immigrants in distant, out-of-state facilities. This is true even when the people detained have pending criminal charges in New Jersey, making it far harder for them to appear for their criminal proceedings. At the same time, open criminal charges make it more difficult for individuals to get out of detention on bond or avoid deportation. Although defendants in detention do not have control over whether they will be brought to court for their criminal case, state and municipal judges in New Jersey have routinely penalized them by issuing bench warrants. As a result, while their criminal cases languish, defendants remain in immigration detention or are deported.

Every defendant has the constitutional right to a speedy trial. When defendants’ criminal proceedings are delayed because they are in ICE detention or have been deported, their speedy trial rights are implicated. In the amicus briefs the ACLU-NJ filed in both State v. Garcia-Moronta and State v. Reyes-Rodriguez, we argue that because the State has tools at its disposal to effectuate defendants’ appearance in their criminal proceedings even while the defendants are in ICE detention or have been deported, any delay resulting from a defendant’s detention or deportation must be attributed to the State in the speedy trial analysis. We urge the court to rule that the State’s failure to take reasonable steps to move criminal cases along should not be held against the defendant.