Bolds

discussion was held off the record, the court explained that petitioner’s counsel was going to request a limited time waiver of the preliminary hearing, but the District Attorney’s Office was objecting. Petitioner’s counsel then explained that she had spoken to the pretrial deputy about the outstanding discovery and had been informed that the District Attorney would not be consenting to a limited time waiver. Petitioner’s counsel then requested a limited time waiver with a last day of August 4, 2024, and in support, she cited People v. Superior Court (Arnold) (2021) 59 Cal.App.5th 923 (Arnold), Garcia v. Superior Court (2020) 47 Cal.App.5th 631, and Favor v. Superior Court (2021) 59 Cal.App.5th 984 (Favor). Respondent asked the prosecutor if she would stipulate to the limited time waiver, and the prosecutor said no. Respondent then told petitioner’s counsel “the Court is not going to allow Mr. Bolds to enter into a limited time waiver without the agreement of the District Attorney’s Office.” Petitioner’s counsel objected, arguing “that the District Attorney does not get to dictate what rights Mr. Bolds does and doesn’t assert. They do not get to decide whether or not Mr. Bolds can…