VIDEO: San Francisco Judge Dismisses 70 Cases Including Domestic Violence and Sex Crimes After COVID Backlog

A judge in San Francisco, California, dismissed 70 cases that included DUI, domestic violence, sexual battery, and deadly driving because of a backlog due to the coronavirus pandemic.

During the pandemic, the San Francisco Superior Court cases were left in legal limbo. But on Thursday, the court considered 76 of the cases, KTVU reported.

“This afternoon, Presiding Judge Anne-Christine Massullo released a statement saying the court was bound by an appeals court decision to dismiss those 70 cases. The court also pushed back on the DA, saying ‘In the future, we hope that the District Attorney’s Office will prioritize cases appropriately so that justice can be served,'” the article read.

Melissa Bonilla is a victim of alleged domestic abuse. She filed a lawsuit against her abuser two years ago but it was dismissed on Thursday, according to ABC 7.

The decision came after a recent court ruling in which the suspect argued her constitutional right to a speedy trial was violated due to the pandemic delays, and “The ruling says the city’s Superior Court has to try cases within a certain time frame,” the report stated.

Now, Bonilla said she is “in shock” due to the outcome.

Watch video:

In a statement, the San Francisco District Attorney’s Office said, “The Superior Court’s Order today, unlike courts in other counties in the post-COVID era that have worked through case backlogs, has unfortunately stripped victims of justice and robbed defendants of their rights.”

Per NBC Bay Area, San Francisco’s criminal courts had a backlog of more than 1,000 cases waiting to be considered:

Meanwhile, Jacque Wilson of the San Francisco Public Defender’s Office told KRON “Everywhere else throughout the state COVID has no longer been an excuse”:

“In San Francisco, they tried to rely on that one a little too long, and the court of appeals said ‘No more.’ And that is what we have been saying all along. We wanted our clients’ constitutional rights protected and that was a right to a speedy trial,” he explained.