cases – Attorney Legal Counsel

DA Challenging Raft of Criminal Cases Being Dismissed by Judges

attorneylegalcounsel99 — Tue, 05 Mar 2024 09:25:33 +0000

(CNS) – Riverside County prosecutors are scrambling to re- file complaints and submit motions challenging judges’ decisions to dismiss hundreds of criminal cases countywide, in what District attorney Mike Hestrin said Monday is fast becoming a “public safety crisis.”

According to the District attorney’s Office, judges have booted just over 500 felony and misdemeanor cases since the second week of October, citing a lack of available courtroom space for trials. Most of the cases were added to dockets during the COVID public health lockdowns, when courts suspended many operations under emergency orders from the California Office of the Chief Justice.

A backlog of roughly 2,800 cases developed. The chief justice’s orders expired on Oct. 7.

“The dismissal of cases and thus allowing criminals back into our community with no consequences for their actions is a danger to everyone,” Hestrin said. “The consequences of the decisions being made from our judges is going to cause extreme harm to victims of crime and our community at-large. This is a public safety crisis, and it needs to stop.”

Felony cases that judges have unilaterally disposed of include those of Steven James Flores and Paul Phillip Powers. In the Flores matter, which originated in the Coachella Valley, he was charged with attempted murder, assault on a peace officer, firearm assault and robbery. In the Powers case, from the Riverside area, he was charged with a hate crime and multiple acts of vandalism.

Prosecutors are re-filing charges against both men, effectively restarting the clock, going back to arraignment. In other matters, prosecutors have filed appeals to have cases reinstated.

“These are cases in which our office has witnesses gathered and has announced that we are ready to begin jury trial,” according to the D.A.’s office. “However, the Superior Court does not have a judge available to hear the case so, rather than granting a short continuance until a trial courtroom becomes available, judges have chosen to dismiss criminal cases and release the accused perpetrators back into the community.”

The majority of cases being dismissed stem from alleged acts of domestic violence.

“When a judge dismisses a domestic violence case, they also terminate the victim’s criminal protective order. This is nothing less than an injustice and a disservice to the victims and to public safety,” Hestrin said.

The state constitution entitles defendants to receive a speedy disposition of their cases at trial.

Superior Court Presiding Judge John Monterosso released a statement on Oct. 25 acknowledging the court system was bearing a heavy load, traced to the lockdowns and consequent changes in court operations.

“I share others’ frustration when a case is not resolved on the merits, or due process is impaired, due to a lack of available judicial resources,” Monterosso said. “The genesis of the current set of circumstances is the chronic and generational lack of judges allocated to serve Riverside County.”

He emphasized that the county has 90 authorized and funded judicial positions, but a 2020 Judicial Needs Assessment Study noted that 115 judicial officers are needed to ensure efficient operations throughout the local court system and prevent logjams.

“The dispensing of statutory timelines for criminal trials under the emergency orders delayed the `day in court’ for numerous criminal defendants and those impacted by the alleged crimes,” Monterosso said. “While the law allows a court to continue a case beyond the statutory deadline for `good cause,’ the decision on whether `good cause’ exists is an individualized decision made by the trial judge based on the law and the facts of the case.”

Hestrin questioned the legitimacy of basing dismissals on a deficit of judicial resources, given that “this has been the case as far back as anyone can remember.”

Monterosso said judges are redoubling efforts to accommodate trial requests, often times summoning prospective jurors for screening late on weekdays to courtrooms where juries in other matters are still deliberating.

However, Hestrin said last month, 500 prospective jurors slated to be assigned courtrooms were sent home, with judges refusing to entertain requests for “brief” postponements until courtrooms became available.

“If we have an emergency in our courts that justifies a dismissal of a felony, then it should be an emergency in every courtroom across the county and should justify an all-hands-on-deck approach to trying cases,” the county’s top prosecutor said.

The current backlog is reminiscent of the cumulative impact of a buildup of unresolved criminal cases in 2007 that prompted the state to dispatch a “judicial strike team” to the county to help sort through criminal cases clogging the court system.

At the time, the Superior Court virtually halted civil jury trials for months while judges focused on reducing the strain on resources. An empty elementary school was even converted into a makeshift courthouse.

Source link

Attorneys and law firms can elevate their online presence with professionally written content from SEO Content Writing Services monthly plan. Our team of experienced writers specializes in crafting blog posts, articles, and written content that accurately reflect the expertise and knowledge of our clients in the legal field. With a keen eye for detail and a thorough understanding of legal terminology, we provide high-quality writing that helps our clients stand out from their competition and engage with their target audience. Trust SEO Content Writing Services for one time article writing or monthly written content to handle all of your written content needs and showcase your law firm's expertise.
If you need written content, blog posts, or articles professionally written for your website, we can help. Go HERE to find out more.
or email us here: myseowritingservices@gmail.com
To find out more about our article writing or blog post services, fill out the form, thank you.

The post DA Challenging Raft of Criminal Cases Being Dismissed by Judges appeared first on Attorney Legal Counsel.

Half of State Attorneys General Speak Out Against California Ban

attorneylegalcounsel99 — Mon, 08 Jan 2024 09:13:52 +0000

Twenty-five state attorneys general, co-led by Montana attorney General Austin Knudsen (R) and Idaho attorney General Raúl Labrador (R), have filed an amicus brief to speak out against California’s unconstitutional law banning magazines that are capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

Knudsen noted in his release announcing the filing of the brief that it was intended to “safeguard law-abiding individuals’ right to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense against unnecessary intrusion.” The release added, “In this case, that unnecessary intrusion is a California law banning firearm magazines that can hold more than ten rounds.”

“The district court properly concluded that California’s law unconstitutionally restricts the fundamental right to keep and bear common firearm magazines typically possessed for lawful purposes,” the attorneys general state in the brief. “This Court should follow the Supreme Court’s mandate from Heller, McDonald, and Bruen by affirming the district court based on the text, history and tradition associated with the Second Amendment and magazines with a capacity over ten rounds.”

California currently bans magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition, and U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez called the law “clearly constitutional,” but California has appealed the decision to the U.S. Court of appeals for the Ninth Circuit and is seeking to have Judge Benitez’s decision reversed.

“The State denies a citizen the federal constitutional right to use common weapons of their own choosing for self-defense,” wrote Benitez. “There have been, and there will be, times where many more than 10 rounds are needed to stop attackers. Yet, under this statute, the State says, ‘too bad.’”

Benitez also said, “It says, if you think you need more than 10 chances to defend yourself against criminal attackers, you must carry more magazines. Or carry more bullets to hand reload and fumble into your small magazine while the attackers take advantage of your pause. On the other hand, you can become a criminal, too.”

Following the ruling, California attorney General Rob Bonta (D) filed an appeal, which sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit. The case originated in 2017 as Duncan v Becerra (Becerra was Cal. AG at the time), and has already been to the Ninth Circuit, and was at one point being considered for a hearing before the United States Supreme Court. After the landmark ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new paradigm for considering legal questions related to the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit for a new review under the Bruen standard. The Ninth Circuit, in turn, sent the case back to the district court, which resulted in the ruling by Judge Benitez.

In addition to Knudsen and Labrador, the amicus brief filed in support of the Benitez decision includes attorneys general from Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Florida, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming.

Knudsen has previously helped guide similar efforts in support of Americans’ constitutional rights. Last year, he co-led a coalition of 26 attorneys general, along with the Arizona State Legislature, against the Biden administration’s blatantly unconstitutional attack on law-abiding Americans’ Second Amendment rights.

And in an interview with America’s 1st Freedom Editor in Chief Frank Miniter, Knudsen explained why the NRA’s First Amendment case NRA v. Vullo is so crucial.

“Government should not be able to come in and act like the mafia,” said Knudsen in the interview. “And that’s really what this was. I mean you had Maria Vullo come in and act like a mobster and basically threaten companies for doing business with the NRA, and it wasn’t overt … . She never made any direct threats, but it was like a Tony Soprano situation. You know, ‘boy, that’s a nice business you have. It would be an awful shame if anything were to happen to it!’”

The post Half of State Attorneys General Speak Out Against California Ban appeared first on Attorney Legal Counsel.