Seems like this must be a very judge-dependent and judge-controlled thing? I imagine lawyers must want to try to throw in the kitchen sink and have tons and tons of witnesses going down every rabbit hole, but the judge has to say no to some things.
Do they set a time limit based on the complexity of the topic? Do they make a gut feel call about whether any particular witness actually adds new information and say “that’s enough”?
Can the judge “game” this and favor one side (intentionally or unintentionally if they don’t believe the side saying that more complexity and duration of witnesses is needed, like for example in a complicated technical case?)
I read about the judicial system being swamped, but are judges using time limits to help move things along better?
In: 2116
It’s really up to the court. Judge, clerks, etc. Some judges may grant continuances and such all willy nilly, other judges will deny.
Also, backlogs are real. In low population areas, court dates may be swift. In high population areas, it may take weeks or months just to be arraigned, then years to ever see an actual court room.
It’s really and truly a “YMMV” situation.
Latest Answers