Legal Opinion
Kling v. Superior Court
California Supreme Court
Decided October 18, 2010No. S176171PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BAXTER, J.
Under Penal Code section 1326, subdivision (c), a person or entity responding to a third party subpoena duces tecum in a criminal case must deliver the subject materials to the clerk of court so that the court can hold a hearing to determine whether the requesting party is entitled to receive them. When, as here, the defendant is the requesting party, the court may conduct that hearing in camera. (Pen. Code, § 1326, subd. (c).)
What is the People’s role at such a hearing? The Court of Appeal held that the People were entitled to notice of, and to be present at, the hearing…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Pitchess v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974
- Michigan v. LucasSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- People v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- People v. BlairCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- People v. AyalaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State of Iowa v. Andrew Lee RussellSupreme Court of Iowa · 2017
- Facebook, Inc. v. City of S.F.California Supreme Court · 2018
- In re DavidCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
- People v. North River Ins. Co., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2019
- People v. Superior Court of San Diego Cnty., California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.