Mendez

Mendez v. Superior Court

Good Law
162 Cal. App. 4th 827·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 652·76 Cal. Rptr. 3d 538
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 30, 2008D051512California3,581 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Rourke, J.

Eduardo Mendez seeks a writ of prohibition against the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss under Penal Code section 1382. Mendez contends (1) the People, in seeking a continuance, failed to comply with the written notice and pleading requirements of section 1050, subdivision (b); (2) the prosecutor’s scheduling problems did not require a continuance of as many as 10 days; (3) a police officer’s unavailability to testify at trial did not constitute good cause for the continuance; and (4) in ruling on the motion to dismiss, the trial court was limited to considering evidence presented at the section 1050 motion hearing. We conclude the trial court, in ruling on the section 1382 motion, could consider information not presented at the section 1050 hearing; accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of prohibition.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On May 31, 2007, Eduardo Mendez entered a not guilty plea to misdemeanor charges of willful infliction of corporal injury; battery of a spouse or cohabitant; and using or being under the influence of a controlled substance. (§§ 273.5, subd. (a), 243, subd. (e)(1); Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a).) He was…

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.