Questions from Illinois:
The day before my trial my Public Defender filed a "Motion for Continuance".
To support that motion she argued the following:
1) Counsel was appointed only one month ago.
2) Counsel has reviewed the docket and feels it is necessary to file and argue several motions to supress.
3) Counsel has been unable to prepare for trial because of the lack of time, and the necessity for more discovery.
4) Counsel is on trial in another matter.
5) In the instant case, to deny the defendant's request would prejudice the defendant in that he would not be able to argue his defense on the legal issues in this case.
Motion was denied by the judge. He said any motions that needed to be filed would have to be filed before court the following morning. They would then be addressed at that time.
The next morning the PD had in fact filed 2 motions to suppress, and 1 motion to dismiss.The Judge said we would go ahead and pick a jury, then have a hearing on the motions after lunch.
PD objected to selecting the jury prior to a hearing on the motions. She argued "Your Honor if I am successful in my motions, picking a jury is a waste of the Courts time"
To this the Judge responded, "The filing of these motions on the day of trial is a waste of the Court's time". We picked a jury, first.
Here are my questions
1) If the Judge appointed the PD, then denied her motion for continuance one day before trial, when she said she was unprepared for trial. Did he not violate my right to "assistance with Counsel" granted by the sixth ammendment?
2) By selecting a jury prior to a hearing on her pre-trial motions, Did he not violate my right to "due process". With the jury impanelled the defense had no opportunity to "take leave to appeal" the judges' rulings on the motions?
3) By picking the jury before hearing the motions, doesn't that strongly suggest that despite what evidence the defense presents to support those motions, the judge is going to deny those motions?
Thanks, feedback appreciated