Victim of Corporal Injury to spouse/cohabitant and need advice

[Jesspbj1]

What is the name of your state? California

I am the victim in where I sustained multiple facial fractures and had surgery. The defendant is out on bond and has been. I was subpoenaed to court yesterday as a witness, there is now another court date where he is to be "held to answer" what does that even mean and why hasn't he be put in jail? My understanding is there will now be a trial or something. I don't want to have to take the stand again if I don't have to. There was plenty of physical evidence the night it happened like blood in the room and of course my broken face! Why is the process being so drawn out and lengthy?

 

[HRZ]

THe accused is entitled to the steps of due process ...and if you want the best odds of putting him away you need to suck it up and cooperate with the prosecution...it's possible if you are a no show that the creep walks ...and you sure as heck don't want that do you?

 

[CdwJava]

What is the name of your state? California

I am the victim in where I sustained multiple facial fractures and had surgery. The defendant is out on bond and has been. I was subpoenaed to court yesterday as a witness, there is now another court date where he is to be "held to answer" what does that even mean and why hasn't he be put in jail? My understanding is there will now be a trial or something. I don't want to have to take the stand again if I don't have to. There was plenty of physical evidence the night it happened like blood in the room and of course my broken face! Why is the process being so drawn out and lengthy?

The justice system is not speedy and the process is designed to benefit the accused, not the victim. Sorry.

If your attacker does not take a plea deal, you will almost certainly have to testify at trial. In order to place the evidence in context or show that the defendant caused the injury to you, you may well have to testify against him. If he has not yet attended a "preliminary hearing" (likely the hearing where the term "held to answer" referred to), you should be able to have a pass on testifying there as that can be done by the investigating officer (CA has carved out an exception to the hearsay rule for these hearings). You can talk to the DA and find out precisely what is happening with regards to the case.

 

[Jesspbj1]

THe accused is entitled to the steps of due process ...and if you want the best odds of putting him away you need to suck it up and cooperate with the prosecution...it's possible if you are a no show that the creep walks ...and you sure as heck don't want that do you?

I am being more then cooperative! I took the stand on Tuesday as a witness and testified.

 

[Jesspbj1]

The justice system is not speedy and the process is designed to benefit the accused, not the victim. Sorry.

If your attacker does not take a plea deal, you will almost certainly have to testify at trial. In order to place the evidence in context or show that the defendant caused the injury to you, you may well have to testify against him. If he has not yet attended a "preliminary hearing" (likely the hearing where the term "held to answer" referred to), you should be able to have a pass on testifying there as that can be done by the investigating officer (CA has carved out an exception to the hearsay rule for these hearings). You can talk to the DA and find out precisely what is happening with regards to the case.

We just had the preliminary hearing and I did take the stand, the responding officer was also there but was not called to witness.The judge found there was sufficient evidence for the felony charge. I have been in contact with the DA but her answers are vague to say the least. We are set to have the "Held to Answer" hearing on the 24th of July. After that it goes to trial or Jury trial? What I don't understand is that there was enough evidence there that night. He was arrested a week later but because the police district had not filed charges he was released. It was only after the charges were filed and a warrant out was he arrested a second time but then bonded out. He has been out on bond ever since.

 

[CdwJava]

We just had the preliminary hearing and I did take the stand, the responding officer was also there but was not called to witness.The judge found there was sufficient evidence for the felony charge. I have been in contact with the DA but her answers are vague to say the least. We are set to have the "Held to Answer" hearing on the 24th of July. After that it goes to trial or Jury trial? What I don't understand is that there was enough evidence there that night. He was arrested a week later but because the police district had not filed charges he was released. It was only after the charges were filed and a warrant out was he arrested a second time but then bonded out. He has been out on bond ever since.

I have no idea what this "held to answer" hearing might be about. If there was already a preliminary hearing, then either he is being arraigned on additional charges (which would be a matter you would not have to appear at) or it is some sort of a motion hearing. Maybe a readiness conference. In any event, you should not have to speak again until trial ... if it goes that far.

As for filing charges, the police do not file charges. If he was arrested, then it's likely that the DA dropped the ball or chose not to file that first time. It's possible that not all the paperwork got to the DA so they missed the arraignment deadline, though. In some instances, getting the reports to the DA with enough time for the DA to make the arraignment deadline can be a challenge.
At trial, the defendant will get to choose whether he wants to have the matter heard by a judge or by a jury. It will depend on the kind of defense he intends to mount. Most of the time they go with a jury.

If he is out on bond, has the court placed any kind of a protective order on him to prevent him from contacting you? HAS he made contact with you since the arrest?

 

[Jesspbj1]

I have no idea what this "held to answer" hearing might be about. If there was already a preliminary hearing, then either he is being arraigned on additional charges (which would be a matter you would not have to appear at) or it is some sort of a motion hearing. Maybe a readiness conference. In any event, you should not have to speak again until trial ... if it goes that far.

As for filing charges, the police do not file charges. If he was arrested, then it's likely that the DA dropped the ball or chose not to file that first time. It's possible that not all the paperwork got to the DA so they missed the arraignment deadline, though. In some instances, getting the reports to the DA with enough time for the DA to make the arraignment deadline can be a challenge.
At trial, the defendant will get to choose whether he wants to have the matter heard by a judge or by a jury. It will depend on the kind of defense he intends to mount. Most of the time they go with a jury.

If he is out on bond, has the court placed any kind of a protective order on him to prevent him from contacting you? HAS he made contact with you since the arrest?

First thank you for your response - Well to my knowledge because the judge found that the evidence presented was enough to go with the felony charges of "corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant" He is now going to be "Held to Answer" at the next hearing on July 24th.

Its then I suppose he chooses Trial or Jury Trial, is that correct? In which time they can also file "motions"? to either dismiss evidence or witnesses? Is that also correct?

And Yes there has been a Protective Order ordered and is still in place, and no we have not had contact with each other.

 

[Jesspbj1]

First thank you for your response - Well to my knowledge because the judge found that the evidence presented was enough to go with the felony charges of "corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant" He is now going to be "Held to Answer" at the next hearing on July 24th.

Its then I suppose he chooses Trial or Jury Trial, is that correct? In which time they can also file "motions"? to either dismiss evidence or witnesses? Is that also correct?

And Yes there has been a Protective Order ordered and is still in place, and no we have not had contact with each other.

The Police officers that responded had a child endangerment charge but the first DA that had the case did not file it and I would like to have that charge in place considering the first two time he struck me I was holding my daughter. I have brought this up to the DA handling the case now but have not seen that that charge has been recovered. Any Advice?

 

[Taxing Matters]

The justice system is not speedy and the process is designed to benefit the accused, not the victim. Sorry.

I'd phrase that differently. The process is designed in part to protect the rights of the accused. Neither the framers of the Constitution nor legislators sit around thinking "what laws can we pass to benefit accused criminals?" I doubt you'd find many defendants saying the process is something they find beneficial.

I have no idea what this "held to answer" hearing might be about. If there was already a preliminary hearing, then either he is being arraigned on additional charges (which would be a matter you would not have to appear at) or it is some sort of a motion hearing. Maybe a readiness conference. In any event, you should not have to speak again until trial ... if it goes that far.

There are several possible results of a preliminary hearing. One is that the defendant is “held over” to trial, which means the trial phase of the proceedings begins. Another is that the defendant is "held to answer." In that case, the DA must file an information with the court and the defendant will then be arraigned on that information. The third possibility is dismissal.

 

[CdwJava]

First thank you for your response - Well to my knowledge because the judge found that the evidence presented was enough to go with the felony charges of "corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant" He is now going to be "Held to Answer" at the next hearing on July 24th.

Yes. The preliminary hearing is essentially a probable cause hearing for felony offenses. Once it is determined that there exists sufficient evidence that the defendant committed the crime and should therefore be "held over" for trial, the prosecutor files the "Information." The hearing ont he 24th is probably where he will be arraigned and a plea accepted. If he pleads "not guilty," a trial date may be set at that time.

Its then I suppose he chooses Trial or Jury Trial, is that correct? In which time they can also file "motions"? to either dismiss evidence or witnesses? Is that also correct?

A trial is a trial. It can be before a judge or a jury, but they are both trials. In the interim, either side can file motions and ask that they be heard prior to trial.

And Yes there has been a Protective Order ordered and is still in place, and no we have not had contact with each other.

That is good, and what I would have expected.

 

[CdwJava]

I'd phrase that differently. The process is designed in part to protect the rights of the accused. Neither the framers of the Constitution nor legislators sit around thinking "what laws can we pass to benefit accused criminals?" I doubt you'd find many defendants saying the process is something they find beneficial.

You are correct. It was a poor choice of phrasing on my part.

 

[Taxing Matters]

Its then I suppose he chooses Trial or Jury Trial, is that correct?

No. He is automatically entitled to a jury trial by default. He does not need to ask for it. He can waive a jury trial and, if the prosecutor also waives a jury trial, it would be tried to the judge, which is known in legal parlance as a bench trial. It is very, very rare to see bench trials in felony and serious misdemeanor criminal cases. Moreover, most cases never reach trial. Something over 90% of all criminal cases are resolved short of trial, often by plea agreement.

 

[Jesspbj1]

Yes. The preliminary hearing is essentially a probable cause hearing for felony offenses. Once it is determined that there exists sufficient evidence that the defendant committed the crime and should therefore be "held over" for trial, the prosecutor files the "Information." The hearing ont he 24th is probably where he will be arraigned and a plea accepted. If he pleads "not guilty," a trial date may be set at that time.


A trial is a trial. It can be before a judge or a jury, but they are both trials. In the interim, either side can file motions and ask that they be heard prior to trial.


That is good, and what I would have expected.

Please excuse my lack of knowledge but what does "arraigned" mean? And I'm almost certain he'll plea not guilty, he's trying to fight it by saying I hit him first. (Closed Fisted).

Also...
The Police officers that responded had a child endangerment charge but the first DA that had the case did not file it and I would like to have that charge in place considering the first two time he struck me I was holding my daughter. I have brought this up to the DA handling the case now but have not seen that that charge has been recovered. Any Advice?

 

[Taxing Matters]

Please excuse my lack of knowledge but what does "arraigned" mean?

The arraignment is the hearing in which the defendant is formally advised of the charges against him and then he enters his plea on those charges.

 

[Jesspbj1]

The arraignment is the hearing in which the defendant is formally advised of the charges against him and then he enters his plea on those charges.

Is it likely that's when he'll be remanded? Or rather that's when a Trial hearing will be decided?