Atwood v. Vilsack.

• Position: PRETRIAL DETENTION

U.S. District Court

SPEEDY TRIAL

CONDITIONS

DUE PROCESS

Atwood v. Vilsack, 338 F.Supp.2d 985 (S.D.Iowa 2004). Pretrial detainees who were awaiting hearings on their sexually violent predator (SVP) petitions, brought a class action against a state corrections department alleging denial of speedy justice. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants in part and denied it in part. The court held that the failure of the corrections department to initiate proceedings for civil commitment of sexually violent predators until immediately prior to discharge of their criminal sentences did not violate their speedy trial rights, because the department was under no duty to minimize time in custody by ensuring that commitment proceedings overlapped substantially with criminal incarceration. The court found that a seven-month average time for trying an SVP case after appointment of defense counsel was not presumptively prejudicial. According to the court, a civil commitment candidate does not have a speedy trial right, until such time as he is identified by the statutory process to be a candidate for commitment. The court held that even though the SVP Act stated that the purpose of pretrial detention was for evaluation, and the detainees were held for periods exceeding the time needed for evaluation, the Act also provided for a safekeeping component. The court concluded that denial of bail for the detainees...