Los Angeles Chemical Co. v. Superior Court

In Los Angeles Chemical Co. v. Superior Court (1990) 226 Cal. App. 3d 703, the magistrate dismissed the case after granting a suppression motion. ( Id. at p. 708.) After the superior court granted the People's section 871.5 motion and denied the suppression motion, the preliminary hearing was resumed and the magistrate held defendants to answer. (LA Chemical, at p. 708.) Rather than file a section 995 motion, the defendants sought writ relief. (LA Chemical, at p. 708.) On appeal, the court held defendants were required to file a section 995 motion prior to seeking writ relief, stating: "There is no inconsistency between the statutory requirement that defendants move under section 995 prior to seeking writ relief and the general rule prohibiting a judge from interfering with the exercise of the power of another department of the same court. . . . First, requiring the defendant to bring a motion pursuant to Penal Code section 995 under these circumstances affords the superior court an opportunity to rule on all issues involving the validity of the order holding the defendant to answer before the defendant seeks appellate review, thus eliminating the need for successive petitions for writ review. Second, the superior court is provided an opportunity to rule upon any issues raised by the admission of additional evidence at the resumed preliminary hearing, prior to review by the appellate court. Finally, the need for appellate review may be obviated altogether by the superior court's rulings on issues other than those involved in the order reinstating the complaint." ( LA Chemical, supra, 226 Cal. App. 3d at p. 711.)