Can My Lawyer Get My Criminal Case Dismissed If The District Attorney Waits A Long Time To File Charges?

When the District Attorney waits many years—or even decades—before filing criminal charges, accused individuals often wonder: Can my lawyer get the case thrown out because the District Attorney took too long?

A recent California Court of Appeal decision, People v. McInnis, provides an important look at how courts decide whether an accused person’s due process rights were violated by long delays. The case shows when a delay might justify dismissal—and when it won’t.

Our experienced criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can guide you through the legal process. Call Wallin & Klarich today toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for your free consultation with one of our criminal defense attorneys near you.

The Story Behind People v. McInnis

In 1994, Karl Senser was murdered, and Leon McInnis was a prime suspect. Although police had some circumstantial evidence, prosecutors believed they did not have enough to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, so no charges were filed.

Decades later, scientific advances changed the case. By 2018, new DNA testing—technology that did not exist in usable form in 1994—produced far more precise results linking McInnis to key evidence. After confirming the findings, the People finally charged him with murder in 2021.

McInnis argued that the 27-year delay violated his due process rights because witnesses had died or forgotten critical details. The trial court agreed and dismissed the case, calling law enforcement’s decades-long delay “negligent.” The prosecution appealed.

Why the Court of Appeal Reversed the Dismissal

In People v. McInnis, the Court of Appeal clarified how courts must evaluate precharging delays:

1. First, the accused must show actual prejudice.

McInnis likely met this requirement because witnesses had died and memories had faded.

But that doesn’t end the inquiry.

2. The prosecution must then justify the delay.

The Court of Appeal emphasized three crucial rules:

Investigative delays are justified.

If prosecutors delay filing charges because they are still gathering evidence and believe they cannot yet prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, the delay is not negligent or tactical.

That is exactly what happened here.

Courts may NOT second-guess the DA’s investigative decisions.

The trial court improperly substituted its own judgment for the prosecutors by claiming there was “strong circumstantial evidence” in 1994. But under California law:

• Prosecutors—not judges—decide when the evidence is strong enough
• Courts cannot retroactively declare that charges should have been filed earlier

This is a separation of powers issue.

The key DNA technology didn’t exist until 2015.

Even though DNA testing generally existed in the 1990s, the specific technology necessary to identify McInnis was not available until many years later. Without the advanced testing performed in 2018, prosecutors could not have convinced a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.

Therefore, the Court of Appeal concluded that the 27-year delay was:

• Investigative
• Justified
• Not negligent

The dismissal was reversed, and the case was sent back for prosecution.

What People v. McInnis Means for Accused Individuals

This case is a powerful example of when a delay won’t justify dismissal. But it also reinforces when dismissal is possible.

Skilled criminal defense lawyers may be able to get charges dismissed if:

• The delay caused real harm to your defense
• The prosecution had enough evidence earlier but waited anyway
• Police or prosecutors were negligent, careless, or seeking a tactical advantage
• Evidence was lost because law enforcement failed to preserve it
• Investigators ignored leads or failed to test available evidence

But McInnis shows that charges are less likely to be dismissed when:

• Prosecutors waited because evidence was not yet strong enough
• Scientific advancements later produced new critical evidence
• The delay was part of a legitimate, ongoing investigation

Why You Need an Experienced Criminal Defense Attorney

Precharging delay issues are highly technical and require a lawyer who understands:

• Constitutional due process
• Case law like People v. McInnis
• When delays are considered negligent vs. investigative
• How to prove actual, demonstrable prejudice

At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys have spent more than 40 years defending clients against old charges, cold cases, and delayed prosecutions. We know how to examine timelines, challenge investigative failures, and fight for dismissal when your rights have been violated.

Call Wallin & Klarich Today

If the District Attorney waited years to file charges against you or someone you love, you may have powerful defenses available. Our experienced criminal defense attorneys will analyze the delay, evaluate whether your due process rights were violated, and fight aggressively for the best possible result—including dismissal of all charges.

At Wallin & Klarich, we have offices all over Southern California: Irvine, Pasadena, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Torrance, and Anaheim. Additionally, our law firm can handle many types of cases statewide. 

Discover how our team can assist you. Contact us today, toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for a free consultation with a skilled criminal defense attorney near you.

Email Us