Lazarevich

People v. Lazarevich

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 419·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 3942·2002 Daily Journal DAR 671·95 Cal. App. 4th 416
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 2001H021290California3,090 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Farrell, J.

On September 15, 1999, defendant Dragisa Lazarevich was charged by information with two counts of retaining and concealing a minor child (Pen. Code, § 278.5). The information alleged that the violations took place between “October 1, 1989, and June 8, 1995.” On February 7, 2000, the trial court concluded that our state did not “maintain jurisdiction” over any of the charged events and therefore granted defendant’s motion to dismiss the information “for once in jeopardy.” Pursuant to section 1238, subdivision (a)(1), the People appeal from the order setting aside the information based upon lack of jurisdiction and once in jeopardy concerns. They contend the trial court erred by dismissing the information because the trial court properly had jurisdiction over the case and because defendant failed to prove that he was placed once in jeopardy for the same charges for the entire time period in question. For the reasons stated below, we shall reverse the order setting aside the information.

Facts

Defendant and Shayna Lazarevich married in 1982. They were divorced in May 1989 in Los Angeles County. In the judgment of dissolution, Shayna was given physical custody of their two…

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.