Women threw hot burrito bowl....

[Robbie Cottam]

Absolutely not. As I posted, this should have been plead out by the DA. THAT is how the rule of law works in misdemeanors.

Unless the the entitled defendant, didn’t want the plea deal…. If which case she would be entitled to a trial….

And I’m not sure what the rules are in CA, but in Ohio if this was a second or subsiquent offense it becomes a felony in the forth degree…

I’m will to bet a dollar this was not her first failure to exercise anger control ….

 

[wvjules]

tvguy, you act as if you have thrown food at a server before with your insistence that it shouldn't have prosecuted. lol

 

[Allison]

Nope. But a basic premise in the law, civil or criminal, it that you try to resolve an issue without going to court.

So, you don't know the law. Thanks for confirming.

 

[tvguy]

A judge is needed for sentencing, regardless of whether it's been pled or not.

Depends on the local law.

tvguy, you act as if you have thrown food at a server before with your insistence that it shouldn't have prosecuted. lol

Not sure where you get that idea. But it appears a Judge did not need to be involved, just the DA and the Defendant.

 

[Karin1984]

The most frustrating part of that article? She is not sorry for her actions. She says she is, but when you read this, you know she is not. She sounds as if she would do it again if her food came out wrong.

Nevertheless, she continued to defend her actions as the judge handed her sentence down.

"You didn't get your burrito bowl the way you like it and this is how you respond?" Parma Municipal Court Judge Timothy Gilligan said to her. "You went in there looking for a fight."

"I did not," Hayne responded. "If I showed you how my food looked, and how my food looked a week later from that same restaurant, it's disgusting looking."

"I bet you won't be happy with the food you are going to get in the jail," the judge retorted.

 

[tvguy]

So, you don't know the law....at all.

The law isn't the issue. The process necessary is the issue. I am saying the DA could have handled this without involving the Court system. DAs all over the country settle cases without involving the Courts. THAT is how the system works.

 

[tvguy]

Unless the the entitled defendant, didn’t want the plea deal…. If which case she would be entitled to a trial….

And I’m not sure what the rules are in CA, but in Ohio if this was a second or subsiquent offense it becomes a felony in the forth degree…

I’m will to bet a dollar this was not her first failure to exercise anger control ….

Correct.

 

[Allison]

The law isn't the issue. The process necessary is the issue. I am saying the DA could have handled this without involving the Court system. DAs all over the country settle cases without involving the Courts. THAT is how the system works.

How did you learn all the details and in and outs of this case? Do you have access to materials we don't?

 

[TippyThomas]

Doesn't a judge have to rule on these no matter how they are processed?

 

[Robbie Cottam]

The law isn't the issue. The process necessary is the issue. I am saying the DA could have handled this without involving the Court system. DAs all over the country settle cases without involving the Courts. THAT is how the system works.

No,
they involve the courts
The case may never go to trial, but the courts are involved….

And when you settle cases without punishing criminals you end up with cities where honest citizen run from….

 

[Robbie Cottam]

Doesn't a judge have to rule on these no matter how they are processed?

Yes,

 

[soccerdad72]

Depends on the local law.

This is my municipal court that she was in.

 

[tvguy]

This is my municipal court that she was in.

Again, why was Court necessary if the DA and the Defendant agreed on the what punishment was?

 

[tvguy]

No,
they involve the courts
The case may never go to trial, but the courts are involved….

And when you settle cases without punishing criminals you end up with cities where honest citizen run from….

And that is my point. The courts didn't need to be involved.

 

[tvguy]

How did you learn all the details and in and outs of this case? Do you have access to materials we don't?

Just read the article that said the defendant agreed to the punishment the DA proposed.

 

[bcla]

Doesn't a judge have to rule on these no matter how they are processed?

Yes. A judge is required to sign off on any agreement with a requirement of personal attendance by the defendant. Even if it's for a diversion program. The only way to avoid that is for the prosecutor to drop the charges.

This is a normal and routine function of any state court system. There is no way for the DA and defense to avoid going through a judge and in a courtroom. I suppose in some cases this can be done remotely, as it was done a few years ago. But that still requires that a judge preside over a hearing.

That being said, I was a jury on a misdemeanor drunk driving trial. That seemed more like a waste of resources, but the defendant was indigent and represented by the public defender. However, it's my understanding that public defenders aren't necessarily free, but heavily subsidized. This was also back when California courts were divided into Superior and Municipal courts, which changed when all lower courts were unified into Superior courts.

 

[BrianL]

Again, why was Court necessary if the DA and the Defendant agreed on the what punishment was?

Because the DA cannot impose a sentence. They can recommend a sentence, but the court imposes it.

 

[soccerdad72]

Again, why was Court necessary if the DA and the Defendant agreed on the what punishment was?

A municipal judge determines sentencing, not the DA.

 

[soccerdad72]

I guess it's been a few days since a thread has gone off the rails due to a tvguy argument...

 

[TippyThomas]

I guess it's been a few days since a thread has gone off the rails due to a tvguy argument...

Always the oddest hills.