Lind

People v. Lind

Good Law
1924 Cal. App. LEXIS 344·68 Cal. App. 575·229 P. 990
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 5, 1924Crim. No. 1107.California2,940 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

Defendant was informed against for a violation of the provisions of section 288 of the Penal Code. He was convicted and he appeals from the judgment and from an order of the trial court denying his motion for a new trial.

The first, contention of appellant is that the trial court erred in granting continuances of his trial after the time fixed by section 1382 of the Penal Code had expired, without the consent of appellant. The portion of the section which is now of interest reads: “The court, unless good cause to the contrary is shown, must order the prosecution to be dismissed in the following cases: ... 2. If a defendant, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application, is not brought to trial within sixty days after the finding of the indictment, or filing of the information. ” It is to be observed that there was no motion made for a dismissal of the action, a procedure which seems to be the object of the letter of the statute. Upon the state of the record before us, which we do not take the time nor the space to recite, we are confronted with the question whether, departing from the strict language of the section, its provisions make it reversible error for a trial…

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.