BAUSTERT

BAUSTERT v. Superior Court

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 4th 1269·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 879·2005 Daily Journal DAR 6274·29 Cal. Rptr. 3d 208·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4605
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 1, 2005D045823California3,556 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nares, J.

Petitioner Steven A. Baustert asserts his misdemeanor trial was continued past the statutory speedy trial deadline set forth in Penal Code section 1382, subdivision (a)(3)(A) (hereafter section 1382(a)(3)(A)) without good cause. We conclude that because no good cause existed for the continuance, Baustert’s statutory right to a speedy trial was violated, and the action should have been dismissed. We therefore grant the petition.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 28, 2004, Baustert was charged with one count of battery on a peace officer in violation of sections 242 through 243, subdivision (b), and one count of resisting a peace officer in violation of section 148, subdivision (a)(1). Baustert was arraigned on June 25, released on his own recognizance, and he entered a general time waiver under section 1382(a)(3)(A). Baustert withdrew his general time waiver at the November 29 readiness hearing, and the court set trial for December 27. Because Baustert withdrew his general time waiver on November 29, he had a right under section 1382(a)(3)(A) to be brought to trial by December 29.

On December 1 the People subpoenaed San Diego Police Officer Turi, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.