I always say there is one common fact about every criminal case: there is the victim's story, the defendant's story and the truth. And the truth usually lies somewhere in between. Logically, anything can happen in criminal case, but if the defendant is totally innocent and blame free, I say go to trial. That why we have trials and from what you've stated, you sound like you have a winning case. Can't understand why the DA is even bothering with this case. This is certainly not right and obviously not fair. Have you gone to the media with this injustice?
The information and legal suggestions made herein do not in any way create an attorney-client relationship. The responses provided herein discuss general principles of law and should not be relied upon by the asker in making legal decisions. Only an attorney who has met with the asker and fully reviewed the facts and circumstances of the asker's individual case should be relied upon for legal advice. If you find my suggestions helpful, please mark the appropriate box as helpful.
What you describe sounds like he has a very good case to present at trial and win. The law provides that he must go to trial within a certain period of time, and if he can't make bail unfortunately he will have to sit in jail until the time of the trial.
I will be happy to speak with you at no cost with a FREE phone consultation if you have a San Diego or California matter. Please call my office at 619-238-1905 or visit my website at www.lawofficeofwilliamdaley.com
Prosecutors in California hate dropping Domestic Violence cases. Arrests are mandated and the Prosecution tries to extract as many guilty verdicts or pleas as possible. Often times when defendants announce ready for trial, the DA lowers the offer to make it more favorable to the defendant.
Seth Weinstein, Esq.
Southern California Criminal Defense Attorney
This reply should NOT be considered a legal opinion of your case / inquiry. At this time I do not have sufficient factual/legal documentation to give a complete answer to your question and there may be more to the issues you raised then I have set out in my brief reply.
Nothing can be done until the evaluation is completed. The defendant should be careful not to catch additional charges for tampering with a witness.
There is no confidentiality online. Volunteering to answer this question does not create an attorney-client relationship. The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The likelihood of a positive outcome- exoneration or a mitigated sentence- is increased with the help of an experienced criminal litigator. Seek out an experienced criminal litigator for a free consultation. If you cannot find one on Avvo, search at the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL.org) Speak to several attorneys and hire the one that makes you feel confident and comfortable. NACDL local members: http://tinyurl.com/8ru8wtv
Educational purposes answer. | FACDL.org | NACDL.org | Defendme.net | twitter.com/JReganLLM | Non-privileged answer.
Sounds like defendants defense counsel ordered a pc1368 evaluation because he/she doubted defendant's competency to stand trial. During this period, criminal proceedings are suspended until there is a Dr. Evaluation and court makes a decision as to competency. If deemed incompetent, defendant cant be tried and criminal proceedings remained suspended until such time when defendant regains competency. Usually defendants competency is restored through a combination of psychiatric medication, psychiatric hospital treatment, and subsequent evaluation. If defendant is deemed competent, criminal proceedings commence again and the defendant with his attorney fights these allegations. If victim doesn't want to testify (thus indicating she may have filed a false police, a misdemeanor), victim needs counsel who would advise her to assert 5th amendment right. If victim takes 5th, she is considered "unavailable" for trial and none of her statements come in through officers or others under 6th amendment confrontation clause. If she is the only witness to the allegation crimes, the case crumbles. Obviously there are many more facts that I may be unaware of that may affect what I've said (and perhaps I'm misreading that defense counsel 1368'd defendant). Regardless sounds like defendant should hire an attorney given that the public defender seems not to be aggressively fighting this case (perhaps I'm also misreading this). Best of luck.