Photo by Ketut Subiyanto on Pexels.com

If you spend time in Massachusetts district court, you’ll hear a lot about “time standards.”

Trial judges are under pressure from their superiors to resolve criminal cases in one year or less. If a case is approaching the one year mark, any lawyer asking for additional time better have a good reason.

Rule 10 of the Massachusetts Rules of Criminal Procedure states that

After a case has been entered upon the trial calendar, a continuance shall be granted only when based upon cause and only when necessary to insure that the interests of justice are served.

Rule 10 then gives factors that a trial judge should consider when deciding whether to grant a continuance.

The factors include:

(A) Whether the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would be likely to make a continuation of the proceeding impossible, or result in a miscarriage of justice.

(B) Whether the case taken as a whole is so unusual or so complex, because of the number of defendants or the nature of the prosecution or otherwise, that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation of the case at the time it is scheduled for trial.

(C) Whether the overall caseload of defense counsel routinely prohibits his making scheduled appearances, whether there has been a failure of diligent preparation by a party, and whether there has been a failure by a party to use due diligence to obtain available witnesses.

Case law adds that

there is no ‘mechanical test’ for determining whether the denial of a continuance constitutes an abuse of discretion because we must examine the unique circumstances of each case, particularly the reasons underlying the request.

Commonwealth v. Pena, 462 Mass. 183, 190 (2012)

Instead,

A judge should grant a continuance only when justice so requires, balancing the requesting party’s need for additional time against concerns about inconvenience, cost, potential prejudice, and the burden of the delay on both the parties and the judicial system.

Commonwealth v. Gilchrest, 364 Mass. 272, 276 (1973)

Most judges will give you about six months to gather evidence and weigh your options. As you approach the one-year mark, prepare for push back when asking for more time.