Castillo v. Superior CourtAnnotate this Case
A felony complaint was filed against Del Castillo alleging residential burglary with a hot prowl allegation, vandalism, and receiving stolen property. On December 28, he was arraigned. On January 11, Del Castillo waived his right to a preliminary hearing within 10 days, expressly preserving his right to have the hearing within 60 days. At the preliminary hearing on February 19, Del Castillo did not appear because he was in custody at San Francisco General Hospital. His hearing was continued twice; Del Castillo remained in the hospital. The hearing was continued to February 26, the 60th day from Del Castillo’s arraignment; Del Castillo was still hospitalized. Defense counsel reported that no assessment had been made as to whether bringing Del Castillo to court would be detrimental to his mental well-being. The magistrate stated that he did not have sufficient information and continued the hearing until February 27. The preliminary hearing did not begin until March 1. Del Castillo unsuccessfully moved for dismissal. The court of appeal issued a writ directing the trial court to set aside the information for failure to begin his preliminary hearing within 60 days of his arraignment. There is no statutory provision that automatically tolls Penal Code section 859b’s 60-day time period for defendants who are receiving mental health evaluations. Section 4011.6 provides for tolling only if a specific determination is made. Before February 26, no determination was made that it would be detrimental to Del Castillo’s well-being to be brought to court. Any such determination made on February 27 was beyond the permissible time period.