California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from The People v. Smithson, 79 Cal.App.4th 480, 94 Cal.Rptr.2d 170 (Cal. App. 2000):
Under these circumstances, where the trial judge considered all the evidence independently, the requirements of due process were satisfied. As with administrative agency adjudications, due process does not require the ultimate fact finder in a suppression hearing to see and hear the witnesses testify. The judge had discretion to hear them if needed, and may have been required to rehear them if he had rejected the magistrate's findings, but otherwise the judge was not constitutionally mandated to rehear the testimony. (United States v. Raddatz (1980) 447 U.S. 667, 679-681 [65 L.Ed.2d 424, 435-436].)
Spence claims he was entitled to a full hearing in the superior court under the holding of People v. McCoy (1983) 147 Cal.App.3d 638. McCoy is distinguishable. There, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss for lack of prosecution. The motion was heard and denied by a magistrate. The defendant renewed the motion before trial, but the trial judge denied the motion without affording the defendant a full hearing. On appeal following conviction, the appellate court remanded the case to the trial court for a full hearing because "[t]he judge obviously believed he was bound by the prior preliminary hearing in municipal court by a magistrate . . . [and] failed to exercise its independent discretion." (147 Cal.App.3d at p. 642.)
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.