Schlick v. Superior Court

In Schlick v. Superior Court (1992) 4 Cal. 4th 310, the Supreme Court held the prosecution was bound by a superior court's ruling after an arraignment, even though the action was subsequently dismissed and refiled by the People, reasoning that the broad language in subdivision (d) stated the property or evidence suppressed shall "not be admissible against the movant at any trial or other hearing unless further proceedings authorized by this section or other specified review procedures are utilized by the people," and the only further proceedings authorized by section 1538.5 when the motion is granted in superior court is appellate review. (Schlick, at pp. 314-315.) Schlick noted that the language of subdivision (j) bolstered its conclusion that a superior court ruling granting a suppression motion is binding in any later action brought by the People on identical charges, explaining at page 315: "The Legislature in subdivision (j) made it explicit that suppression rulings by a magistrate at the preliminary hearing could be relitigated following a dismissal and the filing of a new complaint. The Legislature's failure to include a similar provision qualifying the broad language of section 1538.5, subdivision (d) as applied to suppression rulings by the superior court leads us to conclude the omission was deliberate, and reflects an intention to bar relitigation of those rulings."