What is the effect of the trial court's recent statute of limitations ruling on a motion to dismiss?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from People v. Nemati, A127253, Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 5-090481-3 (Cal. App. 2011):

The timing of the trial court's statute of limitations ruling also refutes defendant's claim he was deprived of his right to have the jury resolve the issue. While a defendant is entitled to have genuine factual issues concerning the statute of limitations submitted to the jury, the failure to raise these issues prior to submission of the case to the jury waives this right. (People v. Lynch, supra, 182 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1276-1277.) The only indication in the record that defendant ever raised the statute of limitations is the trial court's ruling, which responded to a motion to dismiss made after the close of evidence.

Page 8

Other Questions


In a motion to suppress a search and seizure, what is the effect of the trial court's ruling on the motion? (California, United States of America)
Is there any case law where the trial court would have exercised its discretion not to award a motion for damages even if the trial judge was aware of the fact that the motion was being brought before the court? (California, United States of America)
In reviewing a motion to suppress evidence, what is the effect of the trial court's ruling on the motion? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court abuse its discretion in ruling upon discovery motions and denying the motion to dismiss? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant makes a mid-trial motion to revoke his self represented status and have standby counsel appointed for the remainder of the trial, does the trial court have a duty to manage the trial? (California, United States of America)
In a motion to quash service of a summons, what is the effect of the error in the trial court's ruling on the motion? (California, United States of America)
Does a motion for a new trial need to be denied because the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for new trial? (California, United States of America)
Can a defendant obtain a new trial on the grounds that the trial court did not abuse its discretion to deny the motion on the same grounds as the previous motion? (California, United States of America)
Whether a court's ruling is based on oral testimony or written declarations, when conflicting inferences can reasonably be drawn from the facts, can the appellate court defer to the trial court's factual determinations? (California, United States of America)
On a motion to be heard by the Court of Appeal at the Superior Court of California for a change of venue, does the Court have any jurisdiction or authority to hear the motion? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.