In California, the time period for holding a speedy trial for those indicted on misdemeanors is 30 to 45 days. For felonies in California, the time limit is usually 60 days. Violations of a right to a speedy trial could result in a conviction and sentence being wiped out or the charges against a defendant being dismissed if a case has not yet reached trial.
A successful Serna motion will result and criminal charges against the defendant being dismissed. When deciding whether or not to grant a Serna motion in a federal criminal case, a judge will need to balance the following four factors:. However, when a Serna motion is brought under the California Constitution, a state judge will only consider the following two factors:. Any person charged with a crime in California should work with an attorney for help with their case.
The court, unless good cause to the contrary is shown, shall order the action to be dismissed in the following cases:. A defendant may waive his or her right to a speedy trial in the face of misdemeanor charges, in which case the trial may be scheduled after the day deadline. Should you waive your right to a speedy trial? This is a question that only you and your attorney can answer, based on the specific circumstances surrounding your case.
There are advantages and disadvantages to this strategy, and you should discuss these in detail before you make a decision. In many instances, your criminal defense lawyer will need the time between your arraignment and trial date to prepare your case. This includes gathering evidence, lining up witnesses, preparing witnesses for examination and cross-examination and in all preparing a strategy that will offer you the best chance at an acquittal.
If your lawyer believes that waiving your right to a speedy trial will help your defense by providing additional time to build a compelling case, he or she may recommend this approach.
It is also important to note, however, that if you uphold your right to a speedy trial and the court is unable to meet the deadline, this could be used to seek a dismissal of all charges against you. This approach can be risky but could offer significant rewards by resulting in dismissed charges altogether. Thread Tools Email this Page…. Join Date May Posts 3. California Trial De Novo, Speedy Trial 45 Days , and Informal Discovery I've done some extensive searching on Google and on the forums but can't find a topic that covers all three of these issues.
My question is a general question aimed at answering my issue and others' issues if they encounter the same one I understand that according to the California Rules of the Court 4. Is this the same thing is the rule for a speedy trial? In requesting informal discovery for a Trial de Novo, there is a day 'limit' for the prosecuting attorney to respond, that limit can be breached and the defendant can "compel" discovery or perhaps the case can be continued.
However, if the judge wants to continue the case to a date past 45 days of the receipt date of the trial de novo, can the case be dismissed on grounds for failure to provide a "speedy trial"?
Thank you. Join Date Feb Posts 1, Re: California Trial De Novo, Speedy Trial 45 Days , and Informal Discovery That's a pretty good interpretation, however, the thing you are missing is that the court will likely not grant a continuance for your discovery. In fact, when you send in a motion to compel, the court will likely ignore you just as the DA did.
In traffic cases where you are not represented by an attorney, things like discovery, the law, your rights and presumption of innocence are mere annoyances. Re: California Trial De Novo, Speedy Trial 45 Days , and Informal Discovery You've slightly missed my point, my contention is that the court cannot grant a continuance to a date days past your trial de novo receipt date unless you waive your right to a timely trial.
Furthermore, California Law makes it mandatory for the prosecutor to comply with a Informal Discovery request or force them as the only other choice to dismiss the case.
California Penal Code The prosecuting attorney shall disclose to the defendant or his or her attorney all of the following materials and information, if it is in the possession of the prosecuting attorney or if the prosecuting attorney knows it to be in the possession of the investigating agencies: a The names and addresses of persons the prosecutor intends to call as witnesses at trial.
And then if the prosecutor does not comply he has a choice to not initiate prosecution California Government Code The public prosecutor shall attend the courts, and within his or her discretion shall initiate and conduct on behalf of the people all prosecutions for public offenses. I'm trying to verify that this day limit per California Court Rules 4. And trying to verify if the above is correct.
EWYLTJ, your viewpoint of the justice system is very pessimistic, if you had an experience where the court did not properly adhere to the law then you should have taken it to appellate court.
However, the reason my point of veiw is pessimistic I say realistic is because I have seen this happen many times. Courts don't give real consideration to the law in traffic cases. The truth is that the law puts a very hefty burden on the prosecution in CA Trust me, I have experience not only in traffic court, but in the appellate division as well.
Join Date Oct Posts
0コメント