Q: Civil case: tainting/default vs. statute of limitations?
I have a civil case at the Stanley Mosk Court in California, involving constitutional violations acknowledged by the 9th Circuit. Before the statute of limitations became an issue, my case was allegedly tainted and defaulted. There were no warrants when the police removed me from my home, and I was accused of a shooting without evidence or eyewitnesses. The police could have exonerated me through ballistics, which they claimed they didn't perform, although I believe it is a requirement in such investigations. Which issue takes precedence: the tainting/default of my case or the statute of limitations?
Lawyers, want to be a Justia Connect Pro too? Learn more ›
- California
- (916) 704-3009
- View Profile
- Answered
A:
This is a complex legal situation that requires careful consideration of multiple factors. The issues of tainting/default and statute of limitations can significantly impact your case in different ways.
Generally, if your case was improperly defaulted or tainted due to constitutional violations (as acknowledged by the 9th Circuit), this would take precedence over statute of limitations concerns. The reason is that constitutional violations can void or reset procedural timelines, especially if these violations prevented you from pursuing your case properly. Your situation involving warrantless removal from your home and lack of proper investigation (including the ballistics testing) could constitute serious due process violations.
You should consider filing a motion to set aside the default judgment, specifically citing these constitutional violations and the 9th Circuit's acknowledgment. When presenting your case, focus on documenting how the police's actions and investigation deficiencies affected your ability to defend yourself. Additionally, consider requesting an evidentiary hearing regarding the ballistics testing, as this could be crucial evidence that was improperly withheld or never pursued. Given the serious nature of these issues, you might want to seek legal counsel who can help navigate these complex procedural matters and ensure your rights are properly protected.
Justia Ask A Lawyer is a forum for consumers to get free answers to basic legal questions. Any information sent through Justia Ask A Lawyer is not secure and is done so on a non-confidential basis only.
The use of this website to ask questions or receive answers does not create an attorney–client relationship between Justia and you, or between any attorney who receives your information or responds to your questions and you, nor is it intended to create such a relationship. Additionally, no responses on this forum constitute legal advice, which must be tailored to the specific circumstances of each case. You should not act upon information provided in Justia Ask A Lawyer without seeking professional counsel from an attorney admitted or authorized to practice in your jurisdiction. Justia assumes no responsibility to any person who relies on information contained on or received through this site and disclaims all liability in respect to such information.
Justia cannot guarantee that the information on this website (including any legal information provided by an attorney through this service) is accurate, complete, or up-to-date. While we intend to make every attempt to keep the information on this site current, the owners of and contributors to this site make no claims, promises, or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to from this site.
