Results 1 to 9 of 9

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    LA County, California
    Posts
    4

    Default Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    My question involves traffic court in the State of California.

    Hi guys. I am contesting a traffic infraction case and now I am concerned about my right to a speedy trial.

    On January 30, 2014 I requested an arraignment and trial for March 4, 2014. The form I signed says that it is a “REQUEST FOR TRIAL (Not Guilty Plea)”. Also above my signature it says I “. . . intend to plead not guilty . . .”

    On February 11, I submitted an Informal Discovery request, according to PC 1054, to the DA with a copy to the LASD station that issued the citation. Having had no response, and fearing I could not delay trial after February 18, 2014 (10 business days before trial), I requested and received a continuance on that date to April 8, 2014. That form says, above my signature, that I understand that “. . . I am waiving my right to a speedy trial to the new trial date . . .”

    Having had no reply from the DA’s office on my request for discovery by March 11, 2014 (20 days from the request), I filed a Motion for Discovery with the court.

    On March 20, over a month after my request for a new trial date, I received in the mail a form, dated March 18, 2014, from the clerk’s office that said “As to your request for a new trial: Please be advised that the court trial date scheduled for 4/8/14 has been rescheduled for 8/11/14 per officer’s request.” This is a delay of over 4 months! The form gives me that option to contact the court at least 10 days before the new date if I am “unable to comply.” A 4-month delay will require me to go over all this work and research again to be prepared for court and I think that is too much burden; I can forget a lot in 4 months.

    PC 1382 says I must have a trial within 45 days of my arraignment. Since I was to be arraigned, and have trial on the same date, where does that leave me? (I am assuming my appearance before the clerk was not an arraignment nor a plea.) Can I now ask for arraignment or can I formally plead not guilty in court or is it too late?

    Your assistance will be much appreciated.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Behind a Desk
    Posts
    98,846

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    Have you objected to the new trial date? See, e.g., People v. Hender ("In this case, we must presume that defendant consented to the setting of a trial date outside the 60-day period as he did not object to the trial date at the time it was set.")

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    LA County, California
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    Thank you so much for replying. No I haven't. The form the clerk sent gives me 10 days to object to anything on the form, but since I have not been arraigned nor have I plead in court, I am worried objecting is not useful. In Hender's case, which was a felony case, he'd already been arraigned and had pleaded, which gives him a right to a speedy trial according to PC 1382. What I wonder is can I now ask for an arraignment so I can plead in court to get the clock running according to PC 1382. I also have a motion for discovery filed before the court. Can that help to get me get hearing where, I would assume, I'd have to be arraigned and plead beforehand?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    532

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    PC 1382 doesn't apply to your case yet, because the period described in that statute is for time that elapses between arraignment and trial. It sounds like you're using the procedure described in CVC 40519. There, the defendant is arraigned and tried at the same hearing. No time elapses between the arraignment and trial. "Since its inception in 1968, section 40519 has declared that any person using the procedure thus authorized is deemed to have waived his right to be tried within the 'statutory period of time.'" (People v. Prince (1976) 55 Cal.App.3d Supp. 19) By using this procedure, which is intended as a convenience to defendants, the courts have held that this waives your right to a speedy trial. If you don't want to use the procedure described in VC 40519 then you can try going to court and talking to the clerk. There you can request that you be scheduled for an arraignment instead of an arraignment and trial on the same day. When you're arraigned the court should set a trial date. Make sure you don't waive time at that hearing, or consent to a trial date that's more than 45 days after the arraignment.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Officially across the country from where I've been all my life
    Posts
    4,494

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    Quote Quoting Rocky Kern
    View Post
    That form says, above my signature, that I understand that “. . . I am waiving my right to a speedy trial to the new trial date . . .”
    Do you remember signing this?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    LA County, California
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    To the MadNorwegian, I understand, but I wanted to know if I had any other options. I could try to go and ask for an arraignment date and see if they'd give it to me.

    To the CourtClerk (really?), I signed that form, but it said "to the new date" It was not a general waiver of a speedy trial in my mind. Do you think the clerk will give me an earlier arraignment date if I go in and ask even though they are trying to delay the trial by 4 months?

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Officially across the country from where I've been all my life
    Posts
    4,494

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    No. They won't push the date forward. If they went 4 months out to reschedule, there was a reason for it. Sounds like the officer is either out ill, injured or will be gone for some other reason. When I rescheduled traffic trials, the officers had to have their postponement requests signed off by their supervisors and we're talking LARGE agencies like the CHP. If he said he'd be out, he's going to be out

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    LA County, California
    Posts
    4

    Default Re: Trial Rescheduled Beyond Speedy Trial Limit After an Initial Continuance

    CourtClerk, I assume you mean an earlier date. So I am left to wait 4 1/2 months, along with the sleepless nights of worry, and try to remember it all over again. If ever I choose to contest a ticket again I will NEVER request an arraignment and trial on the same date!! Thanks for your help.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Similar Threads

  1. Motions: Right to Speedy Trial - 45 Day Limit
    By wigmeister in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 07-30-2011, 09:51 PM
  2. Motions: Speedy Trial Law As It Applies to a Court Issued Continuance
    By BigSkyMind in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-02-2010, 11:07 PM
  3. Speeding Tickets: Objecting to a Continuance - Speedy Trial Rights in Washington
    By JohnMarston in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-18-2010, 02:58 PM
  4. Motions: California Trial De Novo, Speedy Trial (45 Days), and Informal Discovery
    By zxd in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-28-2009, 01:40 PM
  5. Hearings and Trials: Maintaining Rights to Speedy Trial for Trial by Written Declaration
    By Zod in forum Moving Violations, Parking and Traffic Tickets
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 05-28-2009, 04:35 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources