In Re Weiner

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 136·32 Cal. App. 4th 441·38 Cal. Rptr. 2d 172·95 Daily Journal DAR 2180·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1269
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 2, 1995D022093California1,552 words

Opinion

Opinion

Benke, J.

Does the filing of an appeal by the People constitute a changed circumstance entitling the defendant to a bail review under Penal Code section 1275? Under the facts of this case, we answer that question in the negative and deny the petition.

Background

After jury trial with Judge Napoleon Jones presiding, Murray Weiner (Weiner) was convicted of first degree murder with personal use of a firearm. After arraignment, bail had been set at $250,000. Weiner posted bail and later failed to appear at his preliminary examination. The court issued a no-bail bench warrant and shortly thereafter Weiner appeared on the warrant and was held without bail. After a bail review hearing, bail was set at $2 million.

After Weiner’s conviction, the trial court on its own motion remanded Weiner to custody without bail. One month later, Weiner moved for new trial on the basis of newly discovered evidence, i.e., a third party confession to the murder. Judge Jones granted a new trial. At Weiner’s next court appearance, he requested a bail review. The presiding judge heard the motion and set bail at $2 million.

The People later appealed the grant of new trial. Weiner moved to set “reasonable…

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.