As always, nothing in this saga is not simple.
Mr. Marek Reavis was subbing for his colleague Mr. Elvine-Kreis in said that Mr. Elvine-Kreis told him that the People's motion to disqualify Judge Miles "is untimely."
"The Court believes what is appropriate according to intra court procedure that the Court has followed throughout my career, that if the Judge against whom the peremptory challenge has been filed has the right to decide whether to honor the challenge or not," said Judge Rosenfield.
"Usually the presiding Judge hears the opposition," said Judge Rosenfield. "Judge Miles has acceded to the disqualification. The Court sent it to Judge Miles. The Court is bound by the Judge's decision. This Court cannot force the Judge to hear that case. a 170.3 CCP declaration is called for. That is the Court opinion."
Mr. Reavis said that he had spoken with Mr. Elvine-Kreis briefly and that "we submit on the Court's position."
"The Court is not ruling whether this is untimely or not," said Judge Rosenfield.
Then Mr. Russo asked what other department could hear the next court hearing. Courtroom 5 which is Presiding Judge Joyce Hinrichs court is where the next court date is on August 13. The People were given a deadline to show that they had complied with discovery, upon a request by Mr. Russo.
Judge Rosenfield said that from what he could see "Ms. Pizzo has done everything that was requested of her office." Ms. Pizzo said that there was "no DNA, no ballistic testing, everything that has been agreed to has been provided." DDA Jackie Pizzo is the prosecutor on this case.
Mr. Russo agreed with that toxicology on Daniel Colegrove, the deceased victim had been provided but he said that due t some reports, the defense wants any information blood drawn on Francis Colegrove and Roger Surber given to the defense. Ms. Pizzo said she would request records, if there were any but that she was not aware that blood had been drawn on the other two attempted victims in this case.
August 13 status of discovery will be addressed. After all the discussion of blood and toxicology records, Judge Rosenfield found some records sitting in the file were provided to DA to make copies, provide to defense and return to the Court. "They have been sitting on the file for a while."
Judge Miles was disqualified. Here is a link if you want to read more on http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/CCP/3/1/2/3/s170.3
Mr.
Last post:
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/07/conflict-counsel-files-opposition-to.html
Previous post with links to other coverage on this blog:
http://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2015/07/rodney-and-vincent-ortiz-homicide-jury.html
Not a surprise. There are certain timing requirements for these challenges, but they deal with Courts where Judges are assigned for all purposes or when the Trial judge is definitively known. Humboldt County uses a master calendaring system for trial assignments, ie the Judge who will do the trial is assigned by one particular Court and it is affected by what Judges are available. Learning what Judge tries a case is only discovered on the Friday Trial Assignment Calendar. Since it was unknown at this stage who the Judge would be there is no timing requirement as to when to bring this motion in Humboldt County. The DA was within their right to file it, and Judge Miles was legally correct in accepting the challenge.
ReplyDelete