People v. Gonzales
California Court of Appeal
[Opinion certified for partial publication.*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
address the issue of when the prohibiting of the testimony of a witness in a criminal case is an appropriate sanction for a violation of a discovery obligation. (See Pen. Code, § 1054 et seq.) As we shall explain, we conclude that prohibiting the testimony of a witness is not an appropriate discovery sanction in a criminal case absent a showing of significant prejudice and of willful conduct.
A jury found appellant Heliodoro Salcedo Gonzales guilty of having committed the following crimes on or about February 1, 1992: the kidnapping of Juan Trujano (Pen. Code, 1 § 207, subd. (a); count…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Washington v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- United States v. NoblesSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Taylor v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Cage v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- People v. BowlesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2011
- People v. Huynh, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2018
- Rogers v. WongDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2009
- (HC) Hernandez v. GamboaDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2025
- Castellanos v. FrauenheimDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2020
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.