Prosecution Demands Accused Jailed If Trial Date Vacated Again

By Nicole Mayer 

WOODLAND, CA – The prosecution here expressed her frustration over yet another continuance of a trial date here in Yolo County Superior Court this week, and asked the accused be jailed if another trial date is postponed.

The accused faces multiple felony charges for possession of a controlled substance as well as being armed with a weapon, having possession of a firearm as a person previously convicted of a felony and having possession of ammunition as a person prohibited from owning a firearm.

At the start of the conference, Judge Stephen L. Mock asked the respective lawyers if they were ready for a trial to start next week.

The DDA reported her office had filed for a continuance, hoping to pass the trial for a further date, to which the public defender agreed. Both decided that they needed to discuss an improved schedule, in order for one of their key witnesses to appear, since he could not make the trial next week.

After a brief discussion, both attorneys requested that Judge Mock reset the hearing for Nov. 28. Judge Mock agreed to vacate the trial to this date.

Before finishing, the DDA requested to report a statement to the court, expressing frustration on behalf of the prosecution, given the number of times they have been prepared for the trial, and were forced to reschedule.

The prosecutor made clear this is the fourth time that the accused’s trial has been vacated, and that “on May 22, the People were prepared to go to trial and the accused didn’t show up, and he indicated that he had a flat tire. The jury trial was vacated.”

She continued, “It was set again for June 27, but he was late for court. Judge Maguire then vacated the trial because the jury was left waiting downstairs. So the trial was vacated and set for Aug. 22 at which point the defendant showed up late again, and it was vacated a third time. And on Aug. 29, the defense did pull time.”

The DDA repeated the number of times the court had served the main witness with a subpoena and he has shown up every time for court.

She noted the trial was then set to continue for Oct. 17, but another case that day had priority over this one, resulting in the case getting bumped. Specifically, the case that took priority ended up pleading during jury selection, in which the case had already been vacated.

The prosecution then requested to have the case trailed to Oct. 20, but the defense was unavailable due to a conflict. This motivated the counselors to shift the court date to Oct. 24 of next week.

Judge Mock acknowledged the attorney’s frustration, confirming he still found good cause to vacate the Oct. 24 trial date, and schedule the next trial readiness conference to Nov. 21.

The prosecutor agreed with Judge Mock, but, for the record, noted “…if this case continues again and if it vacates because he is late, the People will ask for a remand (jailing the accused), and hope that if on the fourth time this happens, the court will actually remand him.”

About The Author

Nicole Mayer is a second year student at UC Davis, pursuing a degree in Economics. She is passionate about advocating for others and truthful reporting. She intends to attend law school after completing her undergraduate degree.

Related posts

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for