holding that “[i]f the [appellate] court cannot determine from the available record whether the action is barred, it should ... remand for a hearing”
How later courts described this case
- holding that “[i]f the [appellate] court cannot determine from the available record whether the action is barred, it should ... remand for a hearing”
- discussing prior decisions and stating that "[plrinciples of stare decisis alone caution against swinging from one extreme{-a criminal statute of limitations is jurisdictional-Jto another[-it can be inadvertently forfeited]"
- declining to rule on whether the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense, but rejecting the government’s contention that the defense would be automatically waived if not raised
- where the California Supreme Court noted that the legislature is free to adopt a statute-of-limitations forfeiture rule at any time
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Limited by People v. Meza, 251 Cal. Rptr. 3d 250 (2019)
The Williams court expressly limited its holding to crimes actually pleaded in the charging document itself.
The opinion
KENNARD, J., Dissenting.
Deciding an issue left unresolved in Cowan v. Superior Court (1996) 14 Cal.4th 367 [ 58 Cal.Rptr.2d 458 , 926 P.2d 438 ], the majority holds that a criminal defendant claiming the statute of limitations has expired on a charged offense may assert the claim at any time, even as late as on appeal after conviction, as defendant did here. I disagree.
In Cowan , I joined Justice Brown’s concurring and dissenting opinion which, consistent with the prevailing trend in other jurisdictions and for “sound practical and public policy reasons,” concluded that the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense. (Cowan v. Superior Court, supra, 14 Cal.4th at pp. 387, 389 (conc. and dis. opn. of Brown, J.).) The defense is forfeited if not asserted before or at trial (thus allowing the prosecution a fair opportunity to respond). (Id. at p. 384.)
I would apply that reasoning to this case and hold that defendant failed to timely assert his claim and therefore may not now raise it.