Pickett v. Municipal Court

California Court of Appeal Nov 23, 1970 No. Civ. 35887Published

Before: Frampton

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a trial continuance granted over a defendant's objection to accommodate the convenience of prosecution witnesses, without a showing of due diligence to secure their attendance, does not constitute good cause and violates the defendant's right to a speedy trial.

Issues

Whether there was sufficient showing of good cause to support a trial continuance beyond the statutory limit in a misdemeanor case.
Whether the prosecution's failure to show due diligence in attempting to subpoena witnesses precludes a finding of good cause for a continuance.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The postponement of the trial beyond the statutory period, over respondent’s objection, for the sole purpose of serving the convenience of the prosecution witnesses, may not defeat the respondent’s constitutional right to a speedy trial.”

Opinion

FRAMPTON, J.

was arraigned on May 12, 1969, in the Municipal Court of the Pasadena Judicial District upon a complaint charging six misdemeanor violations. He entered a plea of not guilty as to all counts, and trial was set for June 4, 1969. On May 14, 1969, he was released on bail and has remained at liberty on bail since that time.

On May 27, 1969, on motion of the respondent, the cause was continued for trial until July 9, 1969. On June 11, 1969, respondent noticed a motion to be heard June 16, 1969, for change of venue. This motion was denied on June 19, 1969, after hearing.

On June 16, 1969, at the time of the hearing on the motion for change of venue, the People, without notice, moved to continue the trial to August 20, 1969. This motion was opposed by respondent. The motion to continue was granted and the cause was continued for trial, over respondent’s objections to August 20, 1969. No witnesses were called or affidavits filed in support of the motion to continue. The motion was granted apparently upon an oral statement made in open court by the deputy district attorney in charge of the prosecution of the case.

On August 4, 1969, respondent noticed a motion to dismiss the action pursuant to section 1382 of the Penal Code. This motion was heard on August 7, 1969, and was denied on August 13, 1969.

The minutes of August 13, 1969, reflect the following as good cause for the court’s denial of the motion to dismiss: “The Court finds that the prosecution represented to the Court that many of the People’s witnesses are comprised of school personnel, some of whom would be out of the State on July 9 or would be engaged in teaching summer school; that August 20 was the earliest date which the matter could be set to assure the attendance of these

[1161]

witnesses and which would permit the matter to be tried prior to the commencement of the Fall term; and that defendant did not then and has not since shown any prejudice to his case by the granting of the continuance.

“Therefore, the matter remains set for Jury Trial on August 20, 1969.”

Pickett v. Municipal Court

AI Brief

FRAMPTON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief