Bench Warrant, Domestic Violence, Bellflower, Dismissal

In the early morning hours of July 4, 2017, at about 2:45 a.m., our client allegedly punched his then-former girlfriend in the face and pushed a man with her down to the ground.  Our client was allegedly quite drunk and upset that his former girlfriend was dating this other man.

The short fight took place in front of an apartment complex in Whittier.  A witness to the commotion called 911, but our client drove away from the scene before the police arrived.

When the police arrived, they asked our client’s former girlfriend if she was punched in the face and she said she was, but she refused to identify who punched her.  She said she was not sure.  She had no blood, i.e., a bloody nose or lip. 

The boyfriend showed the police his scraped up arm and back from being pushed to the ground and he positively identified our client as the one who pushed him down and the one who punched his then-girlfriend.

The witness who called 911 told police that our client was the one who punched his former girlfriend.

A few days later, police called our client and asked him if he was outside a Whittier apartment complex in the early morning hours of July 4, 2017.  Our client said he was there.  Police then asked him if punched his former girlfriend and our client told police that he wanted to remain silent.  Police asked him if he pushed another man to the ground.  Our client reiterated that he wanted to remain silent.

Our client was never arrested, but the District Attorney’s Office in Bellflower (the Whitter Courthouse was then closed) filed a misdemeanor complaint against our client, alleging that he committed battery against a former girlfriend, a violation of Penal Code § 243(e)(1). 

Our client did not appear at his arraignment at the Bellflower Courthouse, so the judge assigned to the case issued a bench warrant, setting bail at $20,000 for our client’s failure to appear.

No letter was ever sent to our client, although he lived at the same address from 2016 to 2023. 

In 2023, however, our client was pulled over for speeding.  The police officer let our client off with just a warning, but told him he had an outstanding bench warrant from 2017 from the Bellflower Courthouse for “something to do with you and your girlfriend.”  The police office told our client that he needed to “get rid of the warrant” and let him go.

The client then called Greg Hill & Associates and explained what his employer told him.  The client had no idea what the case was about.

 

Greg was in court in Van Nuys at the time, but returned the phone call to the client.  Greg explained to the client that he could check for a pending case against the client anywhere in Los Angeles County from the computer in the clerk’s office there. 

So, Greg checked, using the client’s name and date of birth.  Nothing showed up.  Greg called the client back and let him know that he was unable to find anything.  Greg commented that in his experience, the courthouse computers often did not have all records, particularly when there were cases filed, but defendant did not appear at the arraignment, like in our client’s case.

Greg therefore asked for the client’s driver’s license number so he could check on this at the Bellflower Courthouse the next time he had such a chance.

The following day, Greg was in the Riverside County Superior Court, but on his way back to Torrance after court, he stopped at the Bellflower Courthouse, as it is just off the 91 Freeway, which Greg was using to return to Torrance from Riverside.

Greg went into the Bellflower Superior Court and asked the clerk in the criminal clerk’s office to search for our client using his name and driver’s license.  She found the case and gave Greg the docket for the case.

Greg then called up the client and described what he had been provided.  Greg then explained what he recommended that the client do next, which was to appear in person with Greg at the Bellflower Courthouse to have the bench warrant recalled.  Greg further explained that if the police report suggested grounds for making an oral motion to dismiss the case under People v. Serna (1985) 40 Cal.3d 239, 707 P.2d 793, 219 Cal. Rptr. 420, Greg would do so.  Such a motion was based on presumed prejudice based on a year or more passing from the date of the case filing and therefore, violation of the client’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial.

The client was very happy with everything that took place.