Judge tells defense to submit PTI materials before Nov. 13 pretrial; TRAS timelines discussed
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
On the 24 CCR docket the court repeatedly directed defense counsel and defendants to submit pretrial intervention (PTI) materials and to notify court coordinator Miss Toller upon acceptance; prosecutors and counsel discussed typical TRAS timing of one to three weeks.
The judge presiding over the 24 CCR docket instructed defense counsel and defendants to submit pretrial intervention (PTI) materials and to provide an answer by the Nov. 13 pretrial conference, the court record shows.
“You need to get it turned in pretty quickly because your pretrial conference is on November 13, and I want an answer by then,” the judge said during a status hearing, directing counsel to submit PTI packets within the next couple of weeks.
The court repeatedly told defendants to notify court coordinator Miss Toller once a PTI contract was executed and fees were paid so the matter could be placed on a compliance or plea calendar. The transcript includes several examples: defense counsel reported receiving PTI contracts and arranging client meetings, and the judge specified that notification to Miss Toller would prompt scheduling of a compliance court date.
Prosecutors and defense counsel also discussed TRAS review timelines (the transcript uses the shorthand TRAS). One prosecutor said that, in their experience, a TRAS decision typically takes about a week after submission and “the longest I've seen is 3 weeks.” In at least one case the court recorded that a PTI had been granted and a TRAS review was scheduled for Oct. 1; the judge cautioned that it may take until the Nov. 13 pretrial conference to receive a final TRAS decision.
Why it matters: PTI acceptance and TRAS approval determine whether a defendant can enter pretrial diversion or treatment programs that may affect case disposition; the court’s Nov. 13 timeframe sets a scheduling milestone for multiple cases on the docket.
Examples from the docket: defense counsel in the case of Joel Munoz Martinez said a PTI contract was in hand and planned to meet with the client to execute it; counsel in other matters reported awaiting mitigation materials or TRAS approval. The judge directed counsel to contact Miss Toller once contracts were executed so the matter could be calendared.
On the record the court emphasized deadlines and follow-up steps rather than issuing new orders beyond scheduling: most statements were directions to file or submit materials and to notify court staff upon acceptance or payment.
No statute or administrative rule was cited on the record for PTI submission timing or TRAS processing time; the timing references came from counsel describing agency practice.