Jan 17, 2016

Kailan Meserve jury trial vacated due to pending appeal of 995 ruling

The defense is planning an appeal of Judge Marilyn Miles's ruling of the 995 motion in the Kailan Meserve case. The jury trial date of January 19 was vacated. A disposition and reset hearing is scheduled for February 4 at 2 p.m.

Kailan Meserve was present in court with his father, Dave Meserve and his attorney Mr. Russ Clanton. Deputy District Attorney Brie Bennett was present for the People.

Dec 21, 2015

Judge Marilyn Miles denies defense 995 motion to dismiss charges against Kailan Meserve which include sexual battery, rape by force and forcible oral copulation

A 995 motion to dismiss most of the sixteen charges including sexual battery, forcible oral copulation, rape by force against Kailan Meserve was denied by Judge Marilyn Miles on December 17, 2016.

Dec 4, 2015

Kailan Meserve jury trial for January 19 date stays set for now

At the December 3, trial confirmation hearing for Kailan Meserve, the trial readiness for the Kailan Meserve was vacated for January 13 was vacated, a trial confirmation was set for January 14 and the Jury trial date remains set for January 19.

Dec 1, 2015


No decision made today on 995 motion to dismiss charges against Kailan Meserve , Judge Miles has taken matter under submission

A hearing for the 995 motion to dismiss charges against Kailan Meserve was scheduled this afternoon at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 2 to be heard by Judge Marilyn Miles.

For this hearing, Deputy District Attorney Zachary Curtis appeared for the People and Mr. David Celli for Kailan Meserve, whose personal appearance was waived for this court hearing.


Judge Marilyn Miles told the attorneys that "this matter is not going to be argued today on a misdemeanor calendar unless you both submit on your pleadings."

Both attorneys said they would.

Judge Miles said that at the last hearing, Mr. Russ Clanton said there would be a lengthy argument. Mr. Celli reiterated the sumbission.

Judge Miles has taken the matter under submission.

Nov 10, 2015


Kailan Meserve 995 motion to dismiss 15 counts including sexual battery, kidnapping and forcible rape continued and case sent to Judge Miles

A motion to dismiss information in the Kailan Meserve case was scheduled this afternoon in Courtroom 5 to be heard by Judge Joyce Hinrichs. Cases for  Courtroom 5  were called in Courtroom 1 this afternoon.

The defense had filed a motion to dismiss information, the People filed an opposition and then the defense filed a reply to the People's opposition.

Mr. Russ Clanton, who is representing Meserve, told Judge John Feeney, "this is a lengthy matter that has been under consideration by Judge Hinrichs. We ask that the matter be set over for two weeks."

Deputy District Attorney Brie Bennett who is prosecuting the case agreed. She said the People needed time to look over the defense's response to the prosecution's opposition to the 995 and see if they will file a response.

Judge Feeney said he had received an email today at 1:15 from Judge Hinrichs, who is the presiding Judge for Humboldt Superior Court. She had given two dates and wanted the matter calendered before Judge Miles.

The 995 motion to dismiss will be heard on December 1 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 2.

Bail was originally at two million and the DA's office asked it be paid by legitimate means. Meserve made bail and is out of custody. Kailan Meserve was in court with his father Dave Meserve.

Oct 22, 2015


Will all charges be dismissed against Kailan Meserve, these include forcible rape, sexual battery and kidnapping

Kailan Meserve had been charged with 19 counts such as sexual battery, kidnapping, forcible rape, forcible oral copulation, criminal threats, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury and the case involves two female victims.

After his preliminary hearing in August, one count dismissed by People, two counts not held to answer; Kailan Meserve held to answer on 15 counts including forcible rape.

The two counts Meserve was not held to answer was first degree residential burglary and assault to commit a felony during the commission of a first degree burglary.

Meserve's attorney Mr. Russ Clanton filed a motion to dismiss information on October 20. Deputy District Attorney Brie Bennett is prosecuting this case. The hearing on this motion is scheduled for November 10 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 5.

The only media coverage on this case has been on my blog.





Sep 3, 2015


Kailan Meserve jury trial set for January 19, arraigned today on 17 felony counts

Kailan Meserve was arraigned on information this afternoon is Courtroom 2 on 17 felony counts with two special allegations. He is being represented by Bay area attorney Randolph Darr and local attorney Mr. Russ Clanton, who made a general appearance today for Mr. Darr.

Meserve was only accompanied in court today by his father, Dave Meserve. A time waiver was entered. Deputy District Attorney Zack Curtis is prosecuting the case but DDA David Christensen handled the arraignment today for the People.

Jury trial is January 19th at 8:30 a.m., Trial Readiness is January 13 at 1 p.m., and Trial Confirmation is December 3 at 2 p.m. in Courtroom 2.

Previous post (with other links):

http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/08/one-count-dismissed-two-counts-not-held.html

3 comments:

  1. John: The technical term for an appeal of the denial of a 995 is s Writ of Mandamus, since there are no "appeal rights" from the denial of a 995. They tend to be a lot quicker, since they are not full blown appeals. It is not uncommon that after a filing a writ within a matter of days you get a one sentence order back saying: "The petition for Writ of Madamus is hereby denied." Neal Sanders just got one granted, so they are not impossible. As you point out the intention of filing one might get a continuance of the trial unless they take quick action on it which as I mentioned is almost always a denial, when it is quick.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks Allan. I quoted what was said in court by Russell Clanton. This is good to know for future posts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. John, so interesting I checked the Court of Appeal website and noticed that a Notice of Appeal was in fact filed, not a Writ of Prohibition.

    http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=1&doc_id=2130501&doc_no=A147247.

    That is not correct. The only thing that was correct to have been filed was a petition for a Writ of Prohibition, pursuant to California Penal Code section 999a, which holds in its pertinent part as follows:

    "999a. A petition for a writ of prohibition...must be filed in the appellate court within 15 days after a motion made under Section 995 to set aside the indictment on the ground that the defendant has been indicted without reasonable or probable cause or that the defendant had been committed on an information without reasonable or probable cause, has been denied by the trial court."

    This procedure was affirmed in the case of Smith v. Superior Court (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 731, which held "If he elects to proceed under section 995 and his motion is denied, he may seek immediate appellate review by a petition for a writ of prohibition filed in the appellate court within 15 days after his motion is denied. (Pen. Code, § 999a.)"

    There is no appeal of a denial of a 995 Motion because it is not a final judgment or otherwise appealable order. An immediate Motion to Dismiss needs to be brought as this is frivolous and is not the right procedure. So Mr. Clanton was correct in Court saying that he had filed an appeal of the court's denial of the 995 motion. Again, filing a 1-page Notice of Appeal when you have no legal right to do so is improper.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.