Arteaga v. Super. Ct.
Annotate this CaseA grand jury indicted Arteaga on charges of participating in a criminal street gang (Pen. Code, 186.22(a)) and conspiracy to sell methamphetamine (182(a)(1); Health & Saf. Code, 11379), with an allegation that he committed the conspiracy for the benefit of a criminal street gang (186.22(b)(1)(A)) and an allegation that he had a prior narcotics conviction (Health & Saf. Code, 11370.2(c)). Arteaga argued there was not “reasonable or probable cause” for the indictment because the only evidence the grand jury received in support of the charges was uncorroborated accomplice testimony. After the trial court denied the motion, Arteaga sought a writ of mandate. The Attorney General argued that Arteaga did not file his section 995 motion within 60 days of his arraignment, which is a prerequisite for pretrial writ review . The court of appeal held that under the circumstances of this case, Arteaga may seek pretrial writ review because he had “no opportunity” to file the motion earlier and was “unaware of the issue.” The court of appeal then held that uncorroborated accomplice testimony can be the basis for a grand jury indictment and denied the petition.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.