Defense adds 4 witnesses, human trafficking questions removed from jury questionnaire

Hearing on the 995 motion in the David Anderson case is scheduled for February 11.  Questions 28 and 37 have been removed from the jury questionnaire. They pertain to Count 1, human trafficking. If the 995 motion is denied, then jurors can be questioned on that topic during voir dire. If they wish to respond privately, then that will be covered via individual questioning.

Another Judge will hear the 995. Judge Wilson provided both the defense and the People penal codes which they can use in their oral arguments for the 995 motion. 

Citing PC 1510, Judge Wilson said, "this indicates an untimely filing. That may raise IAC (ineffective assistance of counsel)."

PC 1510 : "The denial of a motion made pursuant to Section 995 or 1538.5 may be reviewed prior to trial only if the motion was made by the defendant in the trial court not later than 45 days following defendant's arraignment on the complaint if a misdemeanor, or 60 days following defendant's arraignment on the information or indictment if a felony, unless within these time limits the defendant was unaware of the issue or had no opportunity to raise the issue.

Citing PC 871.5, Judge Wilson asked, "Can the People properly bring back a dismissed charge via (arraignment on) information?"

https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/penal-code/pen-sect-871-5.html

Mr. Michael Acosta submitted four rebuttal witnesses which were added to the list. Deputy District Attorney Stacey Eads mentioned California Evidence Code 1108  which is prior acts. 

California Evidence Code section 1108 allows prosecutors to bring in evidence of the defendant's past sexual misconduct, alleged and otherwise, when they are currently on trial for a sex crime.

This is an afternoon update to this morning's hearing. Read post linked below for more details.

Earlier post:

https://johnchiv.blogspot.com/2021/02/995-motion-filed-in-anderson-case-this.html?m=1