Legal Opinion

People v. Mooc

California Supreme Court

Decided January 29, 2002No. S090666PublishedCited by 216 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

WERDEGAR, J.

In Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d

531 [113 Cal.Rptr. 897, 522 P.2d 305] (Pitchess), we recognized that a criminal defendant may, in some circumstances, compel the discovery of evidence in the arresting law enforcement officer’s personnel file that is relevant to the defendant’s ability to defend against a criminal charge. “In 1978, the California Legislature codified the privileges and procedures surrounding what had come to be known as ‘Pitchess motions’ . . . through the enactment of Penal Code sections 832.7 and 832.8 and Evidence Code sections 1043 through…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. United States v. BagleySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. People v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. People v. HillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  5. Pitchess v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1974

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

3Cited by216 opinions

  1. People v. PrinceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2007
  2. People v. FuiavaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  3. People v. YearwoodCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2013
  4. People v. LivingstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2012
  5. Alford v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 2003

211 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