California Court of Appeal

Because the trial court abused its discretion in failing to find materiality and good cause for information sought under a hybrid Brady/Pitchess motion, trial court must perform an in camera review of evidence to ascertain whether it contains information required to be disclosed to plaintiff under Brady.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/18/2003
• Published 09/18/2003

Judges

• HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
•  Plourd & Breeze and John W. Breeze, El Centro, for Petitioner., Carmela F. Simoncini, San Diego, for Appellate Defenders, Inc. Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner., Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General and Charles C. Ragland, Deputy Attorney General, for Real Party in Interest the People of the State of California., Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, J. Scott Tiedemann and Lucy Siraco for Real Party in Interest the City of Calexico.