265 P. 360 | Cal. Ct. App. | 1928
On November 16, 1927, the petitioner herein was held by a justice of the peace of Santa Ana township, in the county of Orange, to answer before the Superior Court of said county upon two separate charges of high misdemeanor, to wit, the selling of intoxicating liquor after prior conviction of a similar offense. Informations were not filed in the Superior Court until December 7, 1927. On the date of arraignment in each case, which was December 16th, demurrers to the respective informations, and motions to dismiss the actions, were filed, based upon the ground that, since the informations were not filed within fifteen days after the defendant was examined and committed by the justice of the peace, as required by section
Section
"When a defendant has been examined and committed, as provided in section 872 of this code, it shall be the duty of the district attorney, within fifteen days thereafter, to file in the superior court of the county in which the offense is triable an information charging the defendant with such offenses. . . ."
The petitioner relies entirely upon the foregoing section and subdivision 1 of section
"When a person has been held to answer for a public offense, if an indictment is not found or an information filed against him, within thirty days thereafter" the court, unless good cause to the contrary is shown, must order the prosecution dismissed. He cites Ex parte Fowler,
Although the language in Ex parte Fowler is not free from ambiguity, the net result of what is said is that subdivision 1 of section
Although we conclude that a failure on the part of the district attorney to comply with section
Respondents urge other grounds upon which they contend that the petition should be denied, but we think it unnecessary to discuss or express an opinion upon them.
For the reasons stated, the alternative writ is discharged, and the application for a peremptory writ of prohibition is denied.
Works, P.J., and Thompson, J., concurred.