[Trial actually, finally begins: oft-delayed-foshee-trial-to-begin ]
Then the trial set for 9/28/2010 was missed: “Defense counsel orally moves to continue the Trial. Defense counsel’s expert witness will not be available to testify at the Evidentiary Hearing…”.
Then there’s a whole bunch more motions and case minutes.
The case minute dated 5/16/2011 which re-sets the pre-trial conference to 5/18/2011, at which time i suppose the trial date will get set (again). “Due to the unavailability of Defense witness”. Trial was then set for August 15, 2011 (! exactly 2 years after the incident).
Oops, another delay (for seemingly unspecified reasons by the state; the defense did not object), make that trial date of 10/4/2011.
Oops Oops again another delay (again, for seemingly unspecified reasons by the state; the defense did not object): new trial date 11/28/2011.
Oops, oops, another delay, another new trial date “The Court finds that delay is indispensable to the interests of justice… A defense expert is not available. IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Continue … resetting the trial to January 23, 2012“.
Some background information and media reports about the incident which occurred 8/15/2009: Queen Creek hit-and-run; driver arrested
Here’s the latest bit of upcoming wrangling: Evidentiary Hearing re: State’s Motion in Limine to
Preclude Any Mention of Victim’s Blood and Oral Argument re: State’s Motion in Limine
to Preclude Defense Witness for April 13, 2011 at 9:30 a.m
The prosecution has dropped the DUI charge (back in March), so I’m not sure what’s what with that — that leaves the manslaughter and 2x endangerment charges going forward.
Another Delay, and two blows against the defense
There was some sort of hearing April 18 with a bunch of substantive rulings. Defense counsel’s Motion to Continue Trial due to the unavailability of a witness was granted, trial now to start May 16, 2011. And in two blows against the defense, the Defendant’s prior DUI conviction will be admissible, and the Victim’s tox results will be excluded.
IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion and the Defendant’s prior DUI conviction is admissible
IT IS ORDERED granting the State’s Motion and excluding the Victim’s Toxicology Results.
And the defense loses AGAIN on 6/17 minute entry:
IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion of Reconsideration. The transcript provided of Dr. Lyons does not establish impairment of the victim; only that he could have been impaired
here are some blog posts about the “ghost bike” memorial: