California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Stanton v. Superior Court, 193 Cal.App.3d 265, 239 Cal.Rptr. 328 (Cal. App. 1987):
The court found the preliminary hearing transcript contained no evidence of the prosecution's dereliction. It ruled an evidentiary hearing was an improper adjunct to section 995 review and the section 995 motion was therefore an incorrect vehicle to challenge the alleged constitutional deprivation. The court was correct. "The purpose of a motion to set aside the accusatory pleading under Penal Code section 995 is to review the sufficiency of the indictment or information on the basis of the record made before the grand jury in the one case or the magistrate at the preliminary hearing in the other. A section 995 motion does not contemplate the introduction of evidence at the hearing on the motion." (People v. Crudgington (1979) 88 Cal.App.3d 295, 299, 151 Cal.Rptr. 737.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.