balancing of many factors in California

2016When the balance falls clearly in favor of the defendant, a trial court not only may but should exercise the powers granted to him by the Legislature and grant a dismissal in the interests of justice.” (People v. Superior Court (Howard) (1968) 69 Cal.2d 491, 505 [ 72 Cal.Rptr. 330 , 446 P.2d 138 ]; accord, People v. Carmony (2004) 33 Cal.4th 367, 375 [ 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 880 , 92 P.3d 369 ].) We review a trial court’s refusal to dismiss for abuse of discretion.

2015Rather, it is limited by the amorphous concept which requires that the dismissal be “in furtherance of justice.” ’ ” (People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 530 .) “A determination whether to dismiss in the interests of justice after a verdict involves a balancing of many factors, including the weighing of the evidence indicative of guilt or innocence, the 6 nature of the crime involved, the fact that the defendant has or has not been incarcerated in prison awaiting trial and the length of such incarceration, the possible harassment and burdens imposed upon the defendant by a

2017Courts must consider 'the constitutional rights of the defendant, and the interests of society represented by the People,' and '[a]t the very least, the reason for dismissal must be "that which would motivate a reasonable judge." ' " ( People v. Hatch (2000) 22 Cal.4th 260 , 268, 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 80 , 991 P.2d 165 .) We review a trial court's refusal to dismiss for abuse of discretion. ( People v. Carmony , supra , 33 Cal.4th at p. 374 , 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 880 , 92 P.3d 369 .) *650 " 'A determination whether to dismiss in the interests of justice after a verdict involves a balancing of many factors,

2017Courts must consider 'the constitutional rights of the defendant, and the interests of society represented by the People,' and '[a]t the very least, the reason for dismissal must be "that which would motivate a reasonable judge." ' " ( People v. Hatch (2000) 22 Cal.4th 260 , 268, 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 80 , 991 P.2d 165 .) We review a trial court's refusal to dismiss for abuse of discretion. ( People v. Carmony , supra , 33 Cal.4th at p. 374 , 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 880 , 92 P.3d 369 .) *650 " 'A determination whether to dismiss in the interests of justice after a verdict involves a balancing of many factors,

2017Courts must consider 'the constitutional rights of the defendant, and the interests of society represented by the People,' and '[a]t the very least, the reason for dismissal must be "that which would motivate a reasonable judge." ' " ( People v. Hatch (2000) 22 Cal.4th 260 , 268, 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 80 , 991 P.2d 165 .) We review a trial court's refusal to dismiss for abuse of discretion. ( People v. Carmony , supra , 33 Cal.4th at p. 374 , 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 880 , 92 P.3d 369 .) *650 " 'A determination whether to dismiss in the interests of justice after a verdict involves a balancing of many factors,

2017Courts must consider 'the constitutional rights of the defendant, and the interests of society represented by the People,' and '[a]t the very least, the reason for dismissal must be "that which would motivate a reasonable judge." ' " ( People v. Hatch (2000) 22 Cal.4th 260 , 268, 92 Cal.Rptr.2d 80 , 991 P.2d 165 .) We review a trial court's refusal to dismiss for abuse of discretion. ( People v. Carmony , supra , 33 Cal.4th at p. 374 , 14 Cal.Rptr.3d 880 , 92 P.3d 369 .) *650 " 'A determination whether to dismiss in the interests of justice after a verdict involves a balancing of many factors,

1970People v. Disperati (1909) 11 Cal.App. 469, 476 [ 105 P. 617 ], This in volves a balancing of many factors, including the weighing of the evidence indicative of guilt or innocence, the nature of the crime involved, the fact that the defendant has or has not been incarcerated in prison awaiting trial and the length of such incarceration, the possible harassment and burden imposed upon the defendant by a retrial, and the likelihood, if any, that additional evidence will be presented upon a retrial.

1970People v. Disperati (1909) 11 Cal.App. 469, 476 [ 105 P. 617 ], This in volves a balancing of many factors, including the weighing of the evidence indicative of guilt or innocence, the nature of the crime involved, the fact that the defendant has or has not been incarcerated in prison awaiting trial and the length of such incarceration, the possible harassment and burden imposed upon the defendant by a retrial, and the likelihood, if any, that additional evidence will be presented upon a retrial.

1959It was said in Fisher Governor Co. v. Superior Court of the City & County of San Francisco, 53 Cal.2d 222, 225 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 347 P.2d 1 ] (decided December 8, 1959), as follows: “The interest of the state in providing a forum for its residents (McGee v. International Life Ins.

1959It was said in Fisher Governor Co. v. Superior Court of the City & County of San Francisco, 53 Cal.2d 222, 225 [ 1 Cal.Rptr. 1 , 347 P.2d 1 ] (decided December 8, 1959), as follows: “The interest of the state in providing a forum for its residents (McGee v. International Life Ins.