gno.law

Ass'n for L. A. Deputy Sheriffs v. South Carolina

California Supreme Court · S243855 · 2017-10-11 · Published · 223 Cal. Rptr. 3d 490 · 403 P.3d 144

ASSOCIATION FOR LOS ANGELES DEPUTY SHERIFFS v. S.C. (LOS ANGELES COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT)

Area
civil
Panel
Cantil (author), Carol A. Corrigan, Goodwin H. Liu, Chin, Sakauye, Mariano-Florentino Cuéllar, Leondra R. Kruger

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion

The petition for review is granted. The parties will brief the following issue: When a law enforcement agency creates an internal Brady list (see Gov. Code, § 3305.5 ), and a peace officer on that list is a potential witness in a pending criminal prosecution, may the agency disclose to the prosecution (a) the name and identifying number of the officer and (b) that the officer may have relevant exonerating or impeaching material in his or her confidential personnel file, or can such disclosure be made only by court order on a properly filed Pitchess motion? (See Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 ; People v. Superior Court (Johnson) (2015) 61 Cal.4th 696, 206 Cal.Rptr.3d 606, 377 P.3d 847 ; Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531, 113 Cal.Rptr. 897, 522 P.2d 305 ; Pen. Code, §§ 832.7 - 832.8 ; Evid. Code, §§ 1043 - 1045.)

Cites, in this corpus