California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rubaum, 110 Cal.App.3d 930, 168 Cal.Rptr. 291 (Cal. App. 1980):
The prosecutor argued that no good cause need be shown to obtain a continuance during the 45-day speedy trial period. She conceded that the officer's vacation was not good cause for a continuance under section 1050. Relying on People v. Flores (1979) 90 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1, 152 Cal.Rptr. 896, she argued that in effect the People had a right [110 Cal.App.3d 933] to a continuance so long as the 45 days had not expired. Defense counsel argued that the failure of the People to serve the officer prior to her leaving on vacation showed a lack of good cause and that he had called the prosecutor the preceding week to determine if the case would be going to trial on the scheduled date.
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.