Ramos

Ramos v. Superior Court

Good Law
146 Cal. App. 4th 719·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 30·2007 Daily Journal DAR 459·53 Cal. Rptr. 3d 189·2007 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 387
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 10, 2007B192395California7,853 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perluss, J.

Penal Code section 859b requires the magistrate to dismiss a felony complaint if a defendant’s preliminary hearing is not held within 60 days of the date of the arraignment, plea or reinstatement of criminal proceedings unless the defendant personally waives his or her right to a preliminary hearing within the 60 days. Section 1050.1, which applies in cases in which two or more defendants are jointly charged, requires the trial court or magistrate, when good cause is shown by one defendant to continue his or her arraignment, preliminary hearing or trial, to use the continuance, upon motion of the prosecuting attorney, to constitute good cause to continue the remaining defendants’ cases so as to maintain joinder.

Does good cause, attributed from one jointly charged codefendant to another pursuant to section 1050.1, permit the magistrate to set or continue the preliminary hearing for both defendants beyond the 60 days prescribed by section 859b in the absence of a personal waiver of the 60-day rule by both defendants? Because the language in section 859b is mandatory and nothing in section 1050.1, enacted as part of Proposition 115 in 1990, signals an intent to provide a…

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.