Legal Opinion

McGinnis v. Superior Court of Alameda County

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 27, 2017No. A149006PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

POLLAK, Acting P. J.

Penal Code 1 section 1054.9 authorizes postconviction discovery of prosecutorial documents in order to prepare a writ of habeas corpus for an inmate sentenced to death or life imprisonment, but requires the cost of copying those documents to be “borne or reimbursed by the defendant.” Pursuant to a directive from the California Supreme Court, we here determine whether a motion for postconviction discovery may be denied solely due to a defendant’s inability to pay in advance for copies of the discovery materials. As we shall explain, such discovery may not be denied…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania v. FinleySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  2. In Re ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
  3. People v. GonzalezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  4. In Re SteeleCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  5. Davis v. Superior Court of Riverside CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. People v. Esparza CA2/1California Court of Appeal · 2020
  2. People v. Mejia CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2020
  3. People v. Wright CA2/7California Court of Appeal · 2020

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API