P. v. Stoltie 10/28/09 CA4/2

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2010 » P. v. Stoltie 10/28/09 CA4/2

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: E048009

Case Date: 01/14/2010

Preview:Filed 10/28/09 P. v. Stoltie CA4/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BRIAN JOSEPH STOLTIE, Defendant and Respondent. E048009 (Super.Ct.No. RIF113348) OPINION

APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Edward D. Webster, Judge. Affirmed with directions. Rod Pacheco, District Attorney, and Alan D. Tate, Deputy District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Appellant. Allison H. Ting, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent.

1

The People appeal from the dismissal of criminal charges against defendant, Brian Joseph Stoltie, pursuant to Penal Code,1 section 1382, based upon the lack of available courtrooms and lack of good cause for continuance of the case on the last day for trial. On appeal, the People contend the trial court abused its discretion (1) by failing to consider the availability of civil judges and courtrooms in order to prevent the dismissal of this last-day criminal case, (2) by misconstruing the meaning of Penal Code section 1050 relating to the precedence of criminal cases over civil matters, and (3) by finding there was no good cause to continue the case beyond the statutory period. After all the briefing was complete, the People made a request to abandon the appeal. We deny the request to voluntarily dismiss the appeal and affirm.2 BACKGROUND The record does not include the original trial transcripts, so we draw some facts from our previous opinion in this case. (People v. Brian Joseph Stoltie (Oct. 25, 2005, E036322), [nonpub. opn.].) Other procedural facts are drawn from the subsequent federal

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code except where otherwise indicated. On June 29, 2009, respondent filed a request that we take judicial notice of three documents. We granted the request as to Exhibit A, a minute order dated June 11, 2009 in Case No. RIF148098, People v. Stoltie, the refiled assault charge. We reserved as to Exhibits B and C, which pertained to cases involving two different defendants, whose cases were dismissed at the same time as Stoltie's case was dismissed. Because those documents are not relevant to our decision, we deny the request for judicial notice as to those exhibits.
2

1

2

decisions following that appeal. (Stoltie v. Tilton (9th Cir. 2008) 538 F.3d 1296; Stoltie v. California (C.D. Cal. 2007) 501 F.Supp.2d 1252.) The defendant encountered the victim after she and her friend left a nightclub. A group of people including defendant and the victim then went to an after-hours party in Corona. While there, the victim's friend was informed the victim had been beaten and raped, and the victim identified defendant as the assailant. When she was taken to the hospital, the victim noticed money was missing. According to defendant, before going into the party, the victim told defendant she was a stripper and agreed to perform a "lap dance" in the car in return for $100, which he placed on the console. After the sex act was completed, defendant's penis itched and burned, causing him to suspect he had contracted a sexually transmitted disease from her. He grabbed the money from the console and attempted to exit the car. The victim grabbed his shirt demanding return of the money, but defendant called her a name and demanded she release him. When the victim refused to let go, defendant hit her with the back of his hand. She continued to hold onto his shirt and yelled at him to give her the money so he punched her in the face and side. The victim finally let go and defendant exited the car. In 2004, defendant was tried by a jury on multiple criminal counts, including forcible rape (

Download P. v. Stoltie 10/28/09 CA4/2.pdf