A petition for a writ of prohibition, predicated upon the ground that the indictment was found without reasonable or probable cause or that the defendant had been committed on an information without reasonable or probable cause, or that the court abused its discretion in utilizing the procedure set out in subdivision (b) of Section 995a, must be filed in the appellate court within 15 days after a motion made under Section 995 to set aside the indictment on the ground that the defendant has been indicted without reasonable or probable cause or that the defendant had been committed on an information without reasonable or probable cause, has been denied by the trial court. A copy of such petition shall be served upon the district attorney of the county in which the indictment is returned or the information is filed. The alternative writ shall not issue until five days after the service of notice upon the district attorney and until he has had an opportunity to appear before the appellate court and to indicate to the court the particulars in which the evidence is sufficient to sustain the indictment or commitment.
Notes of Decisions
Priestly v. Superior Court, 330 P.2d 39 (Cal. 1958).
· cites it 4× “The arrest and search were made without a warrant. [1a] It is settled that "a `defendant has been held to answer without reasonable or probable cause if his commitment is based entirely on incompetent evidence,' .”
Gallik v. Superior Court, 489 P.2d 573 (Cal. 1971).
· cites it 4× “The alternative writ of prohibition (Pen. Code, § 999a) is discharged. Let a peremptory writ of mandate suppressing the challenged evidence (Pen.”
Hudson v. Superior Court of Riverside Cnty., 7 Cal. App. 5th 999 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017).
“The trial court agreed with petitioner that the tolling allegations in the complaint and the indictment were deficient but allowed the People leave to amend so they could add more detail to their tolling allegations.”
Walker v. Superior Court, 763 P.2d 852 (Cal. 1988).
“(Pen. Code, § 999a.) The petition and stay request were summarily denied, and defendant petitioned for review in this court.”
Kaplan v. Superior Court, 491 P.2d 1 (Cal. 1971).
· cites it 2× “) His motion to suppress the evidence on the ground of unlawful search and seizure (Pen. Code, § 1538.5) was denied.”
Higgason v. Superior Court, 170 Cal. App. 3d 929 (Cal. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “Petitioner John David Higgason seeks an extraordinary writ (Pen. Code, § 999a) to compel the dismissal of a felony information charging him with possession of cocaine for the purpose of sale (Health & Saf.”
Williams v. Superior Court, 458 P.2d 987 (Cal. 1969).
· cites it 2× “Code, § 995) was denied, and he here seeks a writ of prohibition to restrain further proceedings in the superior court (Pen. Code, § 999a). At the preliminary examination James M.”
Badillo v. Superior Court, 294 P.2d 23 (Cal. 1956).
“(Pen. Code, § 999a.) No problem is presented in applying this rule in cases involving searches and seizures in which the facts bearing on the legality of the search or seizure are undisputed and establish as a matter of law that the evidence is or is not admissible.”
Theodor v. Superior Court, 501 P.2d 234 (Cal. 1972).
“(Pen. Code, §§ 999a, 1538.5, subd. (i).) In support thereof, defendant urges the following contentions: (1) the magistrate improperly relied, in part, on unsworn and unreported statements in issuing the search warrant; (2) the magistrate erroneously failed to order the…”
Smith v. Superior Court, 76 Cal. App. 3d 731 (Cal. Ct. App. 1978).
· cites it 2× “(Pen. Code, § 999a.) If he elects to proceed under section 1538.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.