fairisfair
Senior Member
Define relevant.
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
Why was my thread closed?
- Thread starter coffeebean
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
Define relevant.
coffeebean
Member
Anybody can post here. I don't mind hearing other opinions. I actually like it. But I don't need sarcastic comments on my thread. You are free to do it, but it will only distance me away from the objective of getting clear support for my trial on monday.
I don't think anybody likes trolls or haters
I don't think anybody likes trolls or haters
fairisfair
Senior Member
Anybody can post here. I don't mind hearing other opinions. I actually like it. But I don't need sarcastic comments on my thread. You are free to do it, but it will only distance me away from the objective of getting clear support for my trial on monday.
I don't think anybody likes trolls or haters
and nobody likes speeders, cheaters, thieves, liars ( "I dont' remember" my @$$) or a number of other descriptive nouns I can come up with.
I just hang out with you to keep Jim company.
and by the way 30 poster boy, who do you think will be here longest?
Like my mission in life is to ensure that you are able to avoid accepting responsibility for your own actions. whatever.
Last edited:
coffeebean
Member
I have been getting very good help here from Jim and HeyThere. That's all, I just want to wait to hear from them so I can be better prepared for my trial.
Coffebean,
From the Penal Code:
Don't get wrapped around the axle about the word "if" in PC1054.1. Read an excerpt from People v. Superior Court (Barrett)
From the Government Code:
When you go into court, you should object to the officer's testimony before he has a chance to say anything. The judge will likely look at you like you have two heads on your shoulders. But, you can simply show him your properly served discovery request and state that the prosecution never provided you with a list of witnesses, therefore this witness should not be allowed to testify. I can imagine that the court will want to blow you off, but you should push the issue a bit. Don't push too far, but be sure that you make it known that you have properly filed a request for discovery and that you have been denied your right to prepare a defense for yourself and that the prosecution is presenting witnesses that it has not informed you about.
So, if the court refuses to dismiss the case, you should demand a continuance and make a motion that the court order the District Attorney to produce the discovery requested.
From the Penal Code:
1054.1. The prosecuting attorney shall disclose to the defendant or
his or her attorney all of the following materials and information,
if it is in the possession of the prosecuting attorney or if the
prosecuting attorney knows it to be in the possession of the
investigating agencies:
(a) The names and addresses of persons the prosecutor intends to
call as witnesses at trial.
(b) Statements of all defendants.
(c) All relevant real evidence seized or obtained as a part of the
investigation of the offenses charged.
(d) The existence of a felony conviction of any material witness
whose credibility is likely to be critical to the outcome of the
trial.
(e) Any exculpatory evidence.
(f) Relevant written or recorded statements of witnesses or
reports of the statements of witnesses whom the prosecutor intends to
call at the trial, including any reports or statements of experts
made in conjunction with the case, including the results of physical
or mental examinations, scientific tests, experiments, or comparisons
which the prosecutor intends to offer in evidence at the trial.
Don't get wrapped around the axle about the word "if" in PC1054.1. Read an excerpt from People v. Superior Court (Barrett)
A prosecutor has a duty to search for and disclose exculpatory evidence if the evidence is possessed by a person or agency that has been used by the prosecutor or the investigating agency to assist the prosecution or the investigating agency in its work. The important determinant is whether the person or agency has been "acting on the government's behalf" (Kyles v. Whitley, supra, 514 U.S. at p. 437 [115 S.Ct. at p. 1567]) or "assisting the government's case." (In re Brown, supra, 17 Cal.4th at p. 881.)
From the Government Code:
26500. The district attorney is the public prosecutor, except as otherwise provided by law.
The public prosecutor shall attend the courts, and within his or her discretion shall initiate and conduct on behalf of the people all prosecutions for public offenses.
When you go into court, you should object to the officer's testimony before he has a chance to say anything. The judge will likely look at you like you have two heads on your shoulders. But, you can simply show him your properly served discovery request and state that the prosecution never provided you with a list of witnesses, therefore this witness should not be allowed to testify. I can imagine that the court will want to blow you off, but you should push the issue a bit. Don't push too far, but be sure that you make it known that you have properly filed a request for discovery and that you have been denied your right to prepare a defense for yourself and that the prosecution is presenting witnesses that it has not informed you about.
So, if the court refuses to dismiss the case, you should demand a continuance and make a motion that the court order the District Attorney to produce the discovery requested.
And if the judge asks me if I did or did not speed, how should I answer? Should I just say "I prefer to exercise my right to not respond" or "I don't have to answer" ? I mean what's the best way to show him that I won't testify against myself? or should I just say that I don't remember?
The Judge won't ask you that... unless he is an idiot... which is a definite possibility. However, if he does ask you anything like that you can simply ask, "Your Honor, I have yet to waive my right not to testify. Is your question a order from the Court that I must waive that right?" Regardless of what he says, you do NOT want to testify as you are not prepared to testify. You are going to court on a discovery defense.
Good luck. Let us know how it turns out.
coffeebean
Member
JimCA thanks so much one more time.
I saw the quote you pasted, but shouldn't I be able to say what is the case number or decision number? Is there somewhere I can find that decision?
Thanks so much
Read an excerpt from People v. Superior Court (Barrett)
I saw the quote you pasted, but shouldn't I be able to say what is the case number or decision number? Is there somewhere I can find that decision?
Thanks so much
coffeebean
Member
Good news.
I was prepared, had all the statutes with me and was ready to object to the officer's testimony. But I wasn't even able to do so. The officer didn't show up and my case got dismissed! I was free to go!
Anyway I would like to thank again JimCA and the ones that provided helpful information to help me understand my rights and how to make sure I don't waive them. In the future, I will know what to do.
Thanks and have a great week!
I was prepared, had all the statutes with me and was ready to object to the officer's testimony. But I wasn't even able to do so. The officer didn't show up and my case got dismissed! I was free to go!
Anyway I would like to thank again JimCA and the ones that provided helpful information to help me understand my rights and how to make sure I don't waive them. In the future, I will know what to do.
Thanks and have a great week!
OUTSTANDING!!!
This is an obvious case of the prosecuting attorney not having any interest in prosecuting the case. After all, the prosecuting attorney prosecutes cases at his discretion. If he chooses not to prosecute, that is his right. I am just amazed that some people would have a person actually plead guilty to a case where the prosecuting attorney had not intention of prosecuting!!
This is an obvious case of the prosecuting attorney not having any interest in prosecuting the case. After all, the prosecuting attorney prosecutes cases at his discretion. If he chooses not to prosecute, that is his right. I am just amazed that some people would have a person actually plead guilty to a case where the prosecuting attorney had not intention of prosecuting!!