tory time limitations on the basis that speedy trial problems are being adequately dealt with under Rule 50(b), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. We have, however, suggested an amendment to cover emergency situations.

My staff has also prepared a draft amendment to Title II of the Act which would place the responsibility for providing "pretrial services" in the United States Probation Service rather than separate pretrial services agencies. This amendment was also drafted in a manner consistent with the overall plan of the Act.

Members of my staff continue to be available to assist you, or your counsel, Mr. Barboza, in any way possible. Please call upon us if you have need of any assistance or information.

You may be interested in the enclosed copy of our preliminary annual report. May I call your attention specifically to pages IX-60 to IX-72, and to Tables D-1 to D-8B in the Appendix.

Sincerely yours,

Enclosures.

ROWLAND F. KIRKS,

Director.

MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS

8. 754-TITLE I

(1) That line 7 on page 2 of the bill be amended to read as follows: ".... the case for trial on a day certain, or list it for trial on a weekly or other short-term trial calendar."

Reason.-Setting a case for trial on a "day certain," except for unusual situations, is contrary to all rules of good judicial administration. Cases normally should be calendared for trial and reached in order on the calendar.

(2) Page 8, line 10. After this line insert the following: “(9) Any delay resulting from an emergency situation, such as the illness or absence of the judge from the place of trial, or a vacancy in judicial office."

(3) Page 10, line 3. Amend this line to read as follows: "[T]he case to be set for trial without disclosing the...."

(4) Page 10, line 5. Strike the words "on such date."

(5) Page 10, line 10. Strike the words "on the date set for trial."

(6) Page 12, lines 23 and 24. Strike the following: "(and the Superior Court for the District of Columbia)."

If a speedy trial bill is to be enacted for the District of Columbia courts, the provisions should be included in the D.C. Code.

§ 3165. District plans—generally

"(a) (1) Prior to the expiration of the twelve-calendar-month period following the date of enactment of this Act, each United States District Court, with the approval of the Judicial Council of the circuit, shall prepare and submit to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts a plan for the trial or disposition of offenses under this chapter during the second and third twelve-calendarmonth periods following the effective date of § 3161 (b) and § 3161 (c). Prior to the expiration of the thirty-six-calendar month period following such date of enactment, each such court, with the approval of such Council, shall prepare and submit to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, a plan for the trial or other disposition of offenses under this chapter during the fourth and fifth twelve-calendar month periods following the effective date of § 3161 (b) and § 3161 (c). Prior to the expiration of the sixty-calendar-month period following such date of enactment, each such court, with the approval of such Council, shall prepare and submit to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts a plan for the trial or other disposition of offenses under this chapter during the sixth twelve-calendar-month period following the effective date of § 3161 (b) and § 3161 (c).

"(2) Each such plan shall be formulated after consultation with and after considering the recommendations of the Federal Judicial Center and any criminal justice advisory planning group established for that district pursuant to § 3166, and shall conform to such guidelines as may be prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The district court may modify such plan at any time with the approval of the Judicial Council of the circuit and shall modify the plan when directed by such Council. The district court shall notify the Administrative Office of the United States Courts of any modification of such plan.

"(b) District plans adopted pursuant to this section shall, upon adoption, become public documents.

§ 3166. Planning process

“(a) The planning and implementation process, under such guidelines as may be prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United States, shall seek to accelerate the disposition of criminal cases in the district consistent with the time standards of the Act and the objectives of effective law enforcement, fairness to accused persons, and efficient judicial administration. The process shall seek to avoid prejudice to the prompt disposition of civil litigation and undue pressure, as well as undue delay, in the trial of criminal cases.

"(b) Each United States District Court may convene a criminal justice advisory planning group which, if established, shall consist at a minimum of the Chief Judge, or a judge of that court designated by him, a United States Magistrate, the United States Attorney, the Federal Public Defender, if any, a private attorney experienced in the defense of criminal cases in the district, and the chief United States Probation officer for the district. The group shall advise the district court with respect to the initial formulation of all district plans for such district.

"(c) The planning group shall submit its recommendations to the district court for each of the district plans it must adopt pursuant to § 3165.

“(d) Members of the advisory group shall receive no additional compensation for their services, but shall be reimbursed for travel, subsistence and other necessary expenses incurred by them in carrying out the duties of the advisory group in accordance with the provisions of Title 5, United States Code, Chapter 57.

§ 3167. District reports

Each district court, at the time of submitting the plan to the Judicial Council of the circuit and to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, shall include a description of the time limits, procedural techniques, innovations, systems, and other methods by which the trial or other disposition of criminal cases has been expedited, or would be expedited, under the plan consistent with the time limits and other objectives set forth in this Act. Such reports shall further specify any rule changes, statutory amendments, or appropriations believed to be needed to effectuate further improvements in the administration of justice in the district which cannot be accomplished without such amendments or funds. § 3168. Reports—Administrative Office of the United States Courts

"(a) An initial report shall be made by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to the Congress, with the approval of the Judicial Conference of the United States, within fifteen-calendar-months after the date of the enactment of this Act, detailing the plans submitted pursuant to the first sentence of § 3165 (a)(1). A subsequent report shall be made within three months following the final date for the submission of plans under the second and third sentences of § 3161(a)(1) of this title.

"(b) Such reports shall include a statement of any need for legislative changes or additional appropriations to achieve compliance with the time limits provided in § 3161 and other pertinent information such as: the state of the criminal docket at the time of the adoption of the plan; the extent of preadjudication detention and release; and a description of the time limits, procedural techniques, innovations, systems, and other methods by which the trial or other disposition of criminal cases have been expedited or may be expedited in the districts. § 3169

"(a) The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, with the approval of the Judicial Conference of the United States, shall prescribe reporting forms, procedures and time requirements consistent with Section 3170, for assembling information (1) concerning the incidence of reasons for extensions of time beyond the statutory or district standards, and (2) the invocation of sanctions for noncompliance with time standards. The forms shall include the pretrial custody information required by Rule 46 (g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure.

"(b) Each department, agency, and instrumentality of the Government, including independent agencies, is authorized and directed to furnish to the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, upon request made by the Director, such statistical data, reports, and other information as the Administrative Office

of the United States Courts deems necessary to carry out its functions under this Act.

§ 3170. Speedy trial reports

"(a) The Clerk of each U.S. District Court shall file a report with the Administrative Office of the United States Courts under regulations prescribed by the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, with the approval of the Judicial Conference. The Clerk is authorized to obtain from all relevant sources the information necessary to compile such report.

"(b) The clerks' report shall include:

"(1) the reasons for granting an extension of statutory limits,
"(2) the new timetable set,

"(3) any sanction imposed for failure to comply with statutory limits, "(4) the identity of cases which, because of their special characteristics, deserve separate or different time limits as a matter of statutory classification; and

"(5) other information pertinent to the operation and implementation of this Act.

"(c) The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall submit a report to the Congress which may be included in the annual report transmitted pursuant to § 604(a)(4) of Title 28, U.S.C. The report shall summarize the reports made under subsections (a) and (b) of this section, and shall set forth recommendations designed to improve the implementation of this Act. Copies of the report shall be made available to the Department of Justice and the General Accounting Office.

83171. Pilot districts

"(a) There is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Judiciary the sum of $5,000,000 to carry out the initial phases of planning and implementation of speedy trial plans under this Act in five pilot Federal judicial districts.

"(b) The pilot districts shall be selected by the Judicial Conference of the United States in consultation with the Department of Justice.

§ 3172. Definitions

"As used in this chapter

"(1) the term 'judge' or 'judicial officer' means, unless otherwise indicated, any Federal district judge or United States magistrate.

"(2) the term 'offense' means any criminal offense which is a violation of any Act of Congress, other than a petty offense (as defined in section 1(3) of this title).

§ 3173. Sixth amendment rights

"No provision of this title shall be interpreted as a bar to any claim of denial of speedy trial as required by amendment VI of the Constitution.

TITLE II-PRETRAIL SERVICES

SEC. 201. Chapter 207 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking section 3152 and adding the following new sections:

§ 3152. Establishment of pretrial services programs

"The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall establish, on a demonstration basis, in the probation office, in each of ten judicial districts (other than the District of Columbia) a program of pretrial services to maintain effective supervision and control over, and to provide supportive services to defendants released under this chapter. The districts in which such programs are to be established shall be selected by the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts after consultation with the Attorney General, on the basis of such considerations as the number of criminal cases prosecuted annually in the district, the percentage of defendants in the district presently detained prior to trial, the incidence of crime charged against persons released pending trial under this chapter. and the availability of community resources to implement the conditions of release which may be imposed under this chapter.

The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, under the supervision and direction of the Judicial Conference of the United States, shall fix the salaries of the Chief Probation Officer in the districts selected for

such program in an amount not to exceed the rate prescribed for GS-16 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 5332.

"§ 3153. Functions and Responsibilities

"The probation office shall perform the following functions and responsibilities with respect to pretrial services:

“(1)(A) collect, verify, and report promptly to the judicial officer information pertaining to the pretrial release of each person charged with an offense, and recommend appropriate release conditions for each such person;

“(B) such information as may be contained in the files or presented in a report or which shall be divulged during the course of any hearing shall be used only for the purpose of a bail determination and shall otherwise be confidential. The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, under the supervision and direction of the Judicial Conference of the United States, shall issue regulations establishing policy on the release of such files. Such regulations shall create an exception to the confidentiality requirement so that such information shall be available to members of the probation office staff and to qualified persons for purposes of research related to the administration of criminal justice. Such regulations may create an exception to the confidentiality requirement so that access to the files will be permitted by agencies under contract pursuant to this title, to probation officers for the purpose of compiling a presentence report, and in appropriate cases to law enforcement agencies for law enforcement purposes. In no case shall such information be admissible on the issue of guilt in any judicial proceeding: Provided, however, such information may be used on the issue of guilt for crime committed in the course of obtaining pretrial release.

"(2) review and modify the reports and recommendations specified in paragraph (1) for persons seeking release pursuant to section 3146(e) or section 3147;

"(3) supervise persons released under this chapter;

"(4) inform the court of all apparent violations of pretrial release conditions or arrests of persons released under this chapter and recommend appropriate modifications of release conditions;

"(5) serve as coordinator for local agencies which serve or are eligible to serve as custodians under this chapter and advise the court as to the eligibility, availability, and capacity of such agencies;

"(6) assist persons released under this chapter in securing any necessary employment, medical, legal, or social services;

"(7) prepare, in cooperation with the United States marshal and the United States attorney such pretrial detention reports as are required by rule 46(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure; and

"(8) perform such other functions as the court may, from time to time, assign. 83145. Duties of the Attorney General

"The Attorney General shall operate or contract for the operation of appropriate facilities for the custody or care of persons released under this chapter including, but not limited to, residential halfway houses, addict and alcoholic treatment centers, and counseling services.

§ 3155. Report to Congress

"(a) The Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall annually make a comprehensive report to Congress on the accomplishments and effectiveness of the pretrial services programs. The Director shall include in his fourth annual report recommendations for any necessary modification of this chapter or extension of these programs to other districts.

§ 3156. Definitions

"As used in sections 3146 through 3155 of this chapter

“(1) the term 'judicial officer' means, unless otherwise indicated, any person or court authorized pursuant to section 3041 of this title, or the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, to bail or otherwise release a person before trial or sentencing or pending appeal in a court of the United States, and any judge of the Superior Court for the District of Columbia, and

"(2) the term 'offense' means any criminal offense, other than an offense triable by court-martial, military commission, provost court, or other military tribunal, which is in violation of an Act of Congress and is triable by any court established by Act of Congress."

SEC. 302. The analysis of chapter 207 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking out the last item and inserting in lieu thereof the following: "§ 3152. Establishment of Pretrial Services Programs

"§ 3153. Functions and Responsibilities.

"§ 3154. Duties of the Attorney General.

"§ 3155. Report to Congress.

"§ 3156. Definitions.

SEC. 303. For the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this title, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated to the Judiciary for each of the fiscal years ending June 30, 1975 and June 30, 1976, the sum of $6,000,000, and to the Department of Justice for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1975 and June 30, 1976, the sum of $ and for each fiscal year thereafter, such sums as Congress

may appropriate.

TITLE III-REPORTS

"On or before the expiration of the seventy-two month period following the date of enactment of this Act, the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts shall file a comprehensive report with the Congress concerning the administration and operation of this Act, including his views and recommendations with respect thereto.

Hon. JOHN CONYERS, Jr.,

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA,

Washington, D.C., October 8, 1974.

Chairman, Subcommittee on Crime, House Judiciary Committee, Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In response to yesterday's request of Mr. Barboza of your staff for my comments on H.R. 7873, I am writing to express my opposition to the enactment of this bill, at least insofar as it affects the D.C. Superior Court. H.R. 7873 would require that indictments and trials of persons charged with criminal offenses commence within specific time periods, and it would also provide for the creation of agencies to supervise persons released pending trial in the federal court system. Title I of the bill, concerning speedy trials, is written to cover the D.C. Superior Court as well as the federal courts, and it is primarily because of this juxtaposition of what is essentially a local system with the federal system that I oppose the enactment of this legislation.

As you are well aware, the past several years have seen significant changes both in the organization of the court system of the District of Columbia and in the basic governmental structure of this city. The Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970 created for Washington, D.C., for the first time, a local court system with jurisdiction over all local civil and criminal matters irrespective of subject matter or seriousness. As a result of the implementation of court reorganization, defendants charged with felonies are now tried in the Superior Court on the average within eight weeks, and defendants charged with misdemeanors are tried on the average within three to four weeks. This time frame compares very favorably to the delays of up to two years which were common in the District prior to court reorganization and which still exist in many bigcity courts. I have no doubt that, if Congress continues to provide to this court system the necessary resources, we will continue to be able to provide dispositions in both criminal and civil cases in an expeditious manner.

One of the consequences of the creation of a separate and independent court system for the District of Columbia has been a lengthy controversy concerning the appropriate budgetary placement of the program for appointing and funding counsel for indigent defendants. The Judicial Conference of the United States and the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts took the position, immediately subsequent to court reorganization, that this program in the local court system should no longer continue to be funded out of the federal Criminal Justice Act. At the same time, local funds were not available for this purpose, and during one period the Superior Court had to resort to drafting attorneys on a large scale to serve without compensation. This controversy was finally resolved early this year by the enactment of a local criminal justice act, patterned after the federal act, which gives the local courts the responsibility for developing and administering a plan for the appointment and compensation of counsel for indigent defendants in this court system. Both court reorganization and the enactment of a local criminal justice act are, of course, inextricably aligned with the movement for home rule for the District of Columbia which