Polanski

Polanski v. Superior Court

Bad Law
102 Cal. Rptr. 3d 696·180 Cal. App. 4th 507·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 2035
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 21, 2009B217290California25,791 words

Opinion

Opinion

Zelon, J.

In another chapter of what surely must be one of the longest running sagas in California criminal justice history, Roman Polanski, a fugitive since 1978, asked the trial court to exercise its discretionary authority to dismiss the criminal prosecution against him that has been pending since 1977. The trial court declined to consider Polanski’s request until Polanski submitted to the court’s jurisdiction by returning to the United States and appearing in court. Polanski asks this court to compel the trial court to dismiss the action or, at least, to conduct an evidentiary hearing on Polanski’s request. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in applying the fugitive disentitlement doctrine and refusing to consider dismissing the action. In so doing, we do not disregard the extremely serious allegations of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct that have been brought forward, but urge the parties to take steps to investigate and to respond to the claims.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

I. Information Established by the Documentary Record, 1977-1978

The limited documentary record of the proceedings in this case furnishes little insight into 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.