San Francisco court dismisses dozens of cases after appellate decision

San Francisco County Superior Court dismissed 70 misdemeanor cases on Thursday following a recent appellate court ruling that found the superior court had unlawfully delayed a misdemeanor trial for over a year, citing COVID-19 as the reason.

In a statement, Presiding Judge Anne-Christine Massullo said, "Our Court was bound by a decision by three justices on the Court of Appeal. There was no discretion. We were required to follow their order.

"In January 2024 there were 722 no-time waiver misdemeanor cases. Most of these defendants were out-of-custody. As of August 13, there were 189 no-time waiver misdemeanor cases, and of those 189, I dismissed 49 cases, and an additional 21 cases were on appeal in our Appellate Division, for a total of 70 cases," Massullo said.

She added that on Thursday she had heard from victims involved in some of the cases.

"Their statements were very moving and this Court honors their bravery in coming forward. In the future, we hope that the District Attorney's Office will prioritize cases appropriately so that justice can be served."

The move was welcomed by the public defender's office.

"The Superior Court did the right and lawful thing today--at long last--in dismissing our clients' misdemeanor cases after depriving them of their Constitutionally-mandated right to a speedy trial," said Deputy Public Defender Andrea Lindsay, a manager of the SF Public Defender's Misdemeanor Unit, said in a press release.

Court representatives have been contacted for comment.

The dismissals stem from an appellate decision in Lynette Mendoza v. The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, A170135 (Cal. App. 1st Dist., July 15, 2024).

The published order arose from a misdemeanor complaint filed on Oct. 14, 2021, in which the petitioner was charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, driving with a blood alcohol content of 0.08% or more, and a traffic infraction, among other allegations.

The petitioner withdrew her general time waiver on Feb. 7, 2023, and requested a speedy trial. The court set March 9, 2023, as the last day for trial. On March 9, 2023, the court continued the trial to June 9, 2023, as part of group of trial continuances under a standard order for COVID-19. The court again continued the trial, to Aug. 8, 2023, without explaining why, and denied the petitioner's motion to dismiss "for the reasons stated in the written order," according to the appellate order.

The case was again continued to Oct. 6, 2023. On that day, the court continued the case yet again to Oct. 12, 2023, and then a few more times to March 15, 2024.

The petitioner filed a motion to dismiss for a statutory speedy trial violation, indicating that the various COVID-19 emergency orders issued by the city of San Francisco, the chief justice, and the governor had long since expired. She argued that the court had failed to use available courtrooms in San Francisco's Civic Center courthouse, which is available for misdemeanor trials.

Prosecutors conceded that there was nothing in the evidentiary record with which to argue that there was a reasonable delay in the misdemeanor backlog, and that there was no good cause to oppose dismissals under California Penal Code Section 1382 in felony cases, the decision stated. Section 1382 guarantees the right to a speedy trial.

"The people not only failed to satisfy their burden to demonstrate good cause for delay but actually concede there was no good cause," the 1st District Court of Appeal's Division 4 panel wrote in a per curiam unanimous decision. Those on the panel were Presiding Justice Tracie L. Brown, and Justices Jon B. Streeter and Jeremy M. Goldman.