Fear Not Law Articles: People v. Standish Part IV

People v. Standish

Filed 6/5/06

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, )

)

Plaintiff and Appellant, )

) S129755

v. )

) Ct.App. 2/3 B166344

JARED JACOB STANDISH, )

) Los Angeles County

Defendant and Respondent. ) Super. Ct. No. MA025716

__________________________________ )

Story continue from part III â€¦â€¦â€¦â€¦..

It is fundamental that a constitutional provision prevails over a conflicting statutory provision. (Hart v. Jordan (1939) 14 Cal.2d 288, 292; Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. v. City of Roseville (2003) 106 Cal.App.4th 1178, 1188.) As explained below, both the language and the history of the OR provision in article I, section 12 establish that: (1) OR release is not a matter of right but a matter of sound court discretion and (2) public safety is a relevant factor which a court should consider in deciding OR release.

The relevant language is â€

Description	Defendant was entitled to be released from custody on his own recognizance, subject to reasonable conditions, when his preliminary examination was continued for good cause beyond the 10-day period specified in Penal Code Sec. 859b. Defendant was not entitled to have information set aside after trial court wrongly failed to grant defendant OR release pending his preliminary examination unless error reasonably might have affected the outcome of the preliminary examination.
Rating	0/5 1 2 3 4 5 0/5 based on 0 votes.