California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

Barnett v. Superior Ct. (People), C051311

Petition for writ of mandate challenging denial of habeas petitioner's discovery requests under Penal Code section 1054.9, is partially granted where the trial court abused its discretion, and where: 1) the Legislature did not intend to require proof of belief in the existence of materials sought; 2) a defendant does not have to provide the prosecution with an inventory of every document he possesses; 3) section 1054.9 does not provide a vehicle for enforcing any obligation the prosecution may have to produce exculpatory evidence they did not possess at time of trial; and 4) an unsworn denial of the existence of any further responsive documents is not a valid basis for upholding the denial of a defendant's motion for discovery under section 1054.9.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 12/05/2006
  • Published 12/05/2006



  • California Court of Appeal


  • For Appellant:
  • Quin Denvir and Daniel J. Broderick, Federal Defenders, Jennifer M. Corey, Assistant Federal Defender;  Robert D. Bacon, Oakland, for Petitioner., Bill Lockyer and Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorneys General, Robert R. Anderson and Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorneys General, Mary Jo Graves, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Ward A. Campbell and Michael P. Farrell, Supervising Deputy Attorneys General, Eric L. Christoffersen, Deputy Attorney General, for Real Party in Interest.

  • For Appellees:
  • No appearance for Respondent.
Copied to clipboard