Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

69 Cal. 540

People v. Camilo

California Supreme Court

Decided May 21, 1886

California Supreme Court · decided 1886-05-21

The defendant was prosecuted by information for the crime of grand larceny, and convicted. The information was filed on the 1st of October, 1885, and on the following day the defendant was arraigned.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1886-05-21

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 1980

8 state decisions

3018861890190019101920193019401950196019701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

McKee, J.

¶1It is the policy of the law, that persons charged with crime shall have a speedy as well as a fair and impartial trial. To that end it is provided by section 1382, Penal Code:—

*541“ The court, unless good cause to the contrary is shown, must order the prosecution to be dismissed in the following cases:—
“ 2. If a defendant, whose trial has not been postponed upon his application, is not brought to trial within sixty days after the filing of the indictment or filing of the information.”

¶2The defendant moved to dismiss the prosecution against him on that ground, and subsequently on the same ground moved in arrest of judgment.- Both motions were denied, and we think there was no error in the rulings of the court, because the record shows that sufficient cause was shown for not bringing the action against the defendant to trial within sixty days after the filing of the information.

¶3As this is the only assignment of error presented by the record, the judgment and order are affirmed.

¶4Myrick, J., Morrison, C. J., Ross, J., Thornton, J., and McKinstry, J., concurred.

/69/cal/540 · .json · Public domain