No Structural Error Petitioner similarly contends that even if he is required to show prejudicehere, he satisfied the requirement because there wasstructural error. He relies on Moonv. Superior Court (2005) 134 Cal.App.4th 1521 (Moon), in which the court of appeal issued a preemptory writ of mandate directing the superior court to enter a new order granting the petitioner’s section 995 motion to set aside an information on the basis that the defendant wasnot legally committed by the magistrate who had erred in denying his request for self-representation. (Moon, supra, at pp. 1531, 1535.)

(Dustin v. Superior Court (2002) 99 Cal.App.4th 1311, 1328.) Ultimately, whether Petitioner’s action in the superior court should have been construed as a non-statutory motion to dismiss or a motion to dismiss pursuantto section 995, the result is the same.Petitioner filed his motion within 60 days ofhis arraignment, and Real Party conceded below that Petitioner has satisfied the procedural timing requirements of section 1510 for the filing of his petition. This Court should resolvethis legal question, but no resolution will result in a procedural bar to Petitioner’s claim. 2. Petitioner Suffered_a Due Process Violation Warranting Dismissal.

(See e.g. 17 RT 4744-4745, 23 CT 6629-6637, 24 CT 6741-6747.) Further, the prosecution argued in opposing Johnson’s motion to dismiss pursuant to section 995, “The prosecution’s theory of the case is that each of the defendants conspired to operate a drug sales organization and to maintain control by any and all means necessary, including violence and death.” (23 CT 6634.)

(2CT 455-466.) On November3, 1998, appellant moved to dismiss the case pursuantto section 995. (2CT 480-506.) On November9, 1998, the prosecution filed an opposition.

RULE 5 - con’t (Eff. 1/01/11) (Eff. 7/01/02) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CRIMINAL RULES REQUESTS FOR ORDERS SHORTENING TIME All requests for Orders Shortening Timeshall be signed only by the Judge hearing the motionorhis/her designee. NOTICE OF MOTION AND RESPONSE a. Except for motions brought pursuant to California Penal Code § 995, if the motion is to be submitted in whole or in part on the transcript of the preliminary examination, or the transcript of any prior proceeding, the Notice of Motion and/or the Response must so state. b. In any Motion brought pursuant to California Penal Code § 1538.5() that is to be presented de novo, notice of this fact must also be set out on the first page of the moving and responding papers.