Legal Opinion

Perryman v. Superior Court

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 24, 2006No. B187073, B187161PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

ROTHSCHILD, J.

In this case, we hold that defendants’ successful motion to quash a jury venire and begin jury selection again with a new panel of prospective jurors was not a “mistrial” motion, despite defendants’ initially having labeled it as such, and, because the prosecution was not prejudiced, it did not trigger a new period in which defendants could be “brought to trial” under Penal Code section 1382, subdivision (a)(2).

FACTS

An information filed August 11, 2005, charged Stanley Bernard Perryman and Nicole Evyette Gaston with selling cocaine base (count 1), and Perryman with…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Batson v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. People v. WheelerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  3. People v. JohnsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. People v. MayfieldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. People v. KelleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Burgos v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
  2. People v. WhitakerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  3. People v. Portillo CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API