Legal Opinion

People v. Hammon

California Supreme Court

Decided July 7, 1997No. S045174PublishedCited by 79 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*1119Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

Before trial commenced in this sexual molestation case, defendant served subpoenas duces tecum on psychotherapists who had treated the complaining witness. Although defendant claimed the records would be necessary to challenge the witness’s credibility, the trial court quashed the subpoenas on the basis of the psychotherapist-patient privilege. We granted review to decide whether the trial court erred by not first reviewing the records in camera and, if so, what the appropriate remedy on appeal might be.

We determine no error occurred. For reasons we explain, the trial court…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  3. Pennsylvania v. RitchieSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
  4. Delaney v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1990
  5. People v. WebbCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by79 opinions

  1. People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 2011
  2. People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
  3. People v. PrinceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  4. People v. GuruleCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
  5. People v. RoldanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005

74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API