Can State Return Defendant to Federal Prison If His Trial Was Delayed ?

In Neville v. Friedman, 67 Ill. 2d 488, 495, 367 N.E.2d 1341, 1344, 10 Ill. Dec. 575 (1977), the court held that the state's return of a defendant to federal prison prior to his trial in state court is acceptable under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) when the defendant's own continuances have caused the delay in the trial. The court noted the basic purpose of the act, reducing obstructions to programs of prisoner treatment and rehabilitation, was inconsistent with keeping a defendant already receiving treatment in federal prison in a county jail designed for short-term incarceration for an indefinite period of time. Neville, 67 Ill. 2d at 493-94, 367 N.E.2d at 1343-44. The court stated that the return of the defendant to the federal prison when there has been a lengthy delay in the trial occasioned by the defendant's own continuances implemented the underlying rehabilitative purpose of the IAD and the case should not be dismissed pursuant to the antishuttling provision. Neville, 67 Ill. 2d at 495, 367 N.E.2d at 1344. In Neville, the court found that the defendant had waived his rights by delaying the trial through continuances and that it was mutually advantageous to return the prisoner to federal custody. Neville, 67 Ill. 2d at 493-94, 367 N.E.2d at 1343-44.