Arraignment: Getting to Court

How quickly must police officers get arrestees in front of a judge? What happens if they're late?

People who have been arrested—particularly those who haven't bailed out of jail or been released on their own recognizance ("O.R.")—want to know when they'll get in front of a judge. They want to know the charges they face, whether they can get out of custody (jail), and whatever else about the criminal process they can glean from that first court appearance.

Many states refer to the first appearance as "arraignment," while others use terms like "initial appearance." Some states will have both an initial appearance and arraignment depending on the circumstances. No matter how they describe it, they all prohibit law enforcement agencies from confining suspects indefinitely, without judicial oversight.

When Is the Arraignment?

The timing of the initial appearance varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction—and isn't always clear. (In fact, rules on arraignment and initial appearance can even differ from one city or county to another.) Some state laws specify how soon suspects are entitled to appear in court, while others vaguely ban "unnecessary delay" after arrest. Typically, though, a person who was arrested and is sitting in jail must get before a judge within 24 to 72 hours (with some exceptions).

What Happens at the Arraignment?


  • take the defendant's plea (see How should I plead at arraignment?)
  • determine whether to set bail and in what amount, including whether to release the defendant on O.R.
  • establish conditions for the defendant's release pending resolution of the case (such as travel restrictions or a ban on contact with the alleged victim), or

What Is a Probable Cause Determination?

Some states combine "probable cause determinations" with the initial court appearance. That's because, for law enforcement to keep a suspect in custody pursuant to a warrantless arrest, the Fourth Amendment requires a judicial determination of probable cause. (Most arrests are warrantless.) If the court doesn't find probable cause (sufficient grounds) to believe the defendant committed the crime—a rare occurrence—it must order the defendant's release.

Informal. Probable cause determinations may be informal, based only on affidavits, which are a form of sworn written statements, or similar documents. The defendant's presence may not even be required.

Timing. If the government (a county, for example) combines probable cause determinations with initial appearances, it must hold them "as soon as is reasonably feasible, but in no event later than 48 hours after arrest." (Weekends are included within the 48-hour calculation.) Even a less-than-48-hour delay may be unreasonable—for instance, if officers orchestrated it in order to allow time for the defendant to confess. If authorities go beyond the 48-hour window, the government has the burden of proving that an emergency caused the delay. (County of Riverside v. McLaughlin, 500 U.S. 44 (1991).)

Delays. Despite the Supreme Court ruling that initial appearances that are combined with probable cause hearings must be held within 48 hours of arrest, many jurisdictions provide a 72-hour window for arraignment. This allows for the timely arraignment of defendants nabbed over the weekend. Regardless of the 48-hour "mandate," courts routinely approve the 72-hour schedule.

Can a Defendant Challenge an Unnecessary or Illegal Delay?

In practice, government agents have a bit of slack—as long as they make a conscientious effort to get a suspect in front of a judge quickly, they're probably in the clear. And even an illegal delay in bringing a defendant to court probably won't invalidate a subsequent conviction unless the delay somehow contributed to it. (U.S. v. Chavez, 705 F.3d 381 (8th Cir. 2013); Morse v. U.S., 256 F.2d 280 (5th Cir. 1958).)

In a 2009 federal case, for example, FBI agents arrested the defendant for bank robbery pursuant to an arrest warrant early on a Friday morning. The agents began trying to locate a magistrate shortly after the arrest but couldn't find one who was free before Monday, which is when they ended up taking the defendant to court. In the meanwhile, the officers interviewed the defendant—during that interview, which was more than 12 hours after the arrest, he gave self-incriminating statements.

The defendant asked the court to suppress (exclude) his statements because he made them before officers had brought him to a judge. Federal law allows for the suppression of any statements made by a defendant before an initial court appearance if there was an unnecessary delay in getting him or her before a judicial officer. (Statements by the suspect within six hours of arrest are presumptively admissible.) But, because the court considered the delay between the defendant's arrest and first appearance reasonable, it refused to suppress the defendant's statements. (U.S. v. Harrold, 679 F.Supp.2d 1336 (N.D. Ga. 2009).)

Consult a Lawyer


Talk to a Lawyer

Start here to find criminal defense lawyers near you.

How it Works

  1. Briefly tell us about your case
  2. Provide your contact information
  3. Choose attorneys to contact you

Talk to a Defense attorney

We've helped 95 clients find attorneys today.

How It Works

  1. Briefly tell us about your case
  2. Provide your contact information
  3. Choose attorneys to contact you