If I was arrested on a remey warrant, and released because I wasn't arraigned within 48 hrs. Why is it they say the DA has up to a year to file charges? What about my rights? Isn't that why they made that law? So they can issue a warrant and grab me anytime now?

Is it considered conflict of interest if I have the same judge and DA as a minor and the fact that the DA has brought up a repeat activity as a child and now as an adult too, to the court and judge?

When did you turn 18 and what was the nature of the crime? Was it a single act or a series of acts?

The Ramey warrant allows police to bring you in just by going to a judge, not the DA. Then you were released without being charged when their 48 hours expired. They got a Ramey warrant because they weren't witnesses to the crime and wanted to hurry, basically. Had they been witnesses, they could 'bring you in for questioning' the same way, and would have to release you the same way if they can't get the DA to prosecute, but it still doesn't mean they can't arrest you later on. In other words, until you are CHARGED, there is no end to this (unless you want to pay a lawyer a lot of money to claim harassment - 'either charge my client or leave him alone'). I suppose you could try to get your PD to say that. But that would be after many arrests.

It is not a conflict of interest for an adult to have the same judge and DA as he had when he's an adult. The judge and DA get to know your past. It's the judge who decides after arguments by your defending lawyer whether to allow your past to be presented before a jury.