California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. McElroy, 208 Cal.App.3d 1415, 256 Cal.Rptr. 853 (Cal. App. 1989):
McElroy contends the trial court erred in finding "due diligence" had been exercised. 8 We disagree. The record amply supports the trial court's determination that due diligence was exercised. The subpoenas were issued 24 days in advance of trial; even shorter periods have been found reasonable. (People v. Clayton (1967) 248 Cal.App.2d 345, 56 Cal.Rptr. 413 [18 days].) After customary efforts to serve the witnesses were undertaken, without success, investigators undertook significant efforts to locate the missing witnesses. The investigators visited the witnesses' last known addresses; contacted roommates, parents and family members seeking current addresses, and left messages in case the witness contacted these individuals; contacted former employers; reviewed county and state-wide police records; checked motor vehicle department records; checked traffic court records; and checked post office records.
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.