People v. Superior Court (Broderick)

Bad Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 687·231 Cal. App. 3d 584·282 Cal. Rptr. 418·91 Daily Journal DAR 7490·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4827
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 21, 1991D014253California3,543 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

The People seek a writ of mandate or prohibition after the court quashed subpoenas duces tecum seeking records from various mental health professionals (doctors) who had treated or tested Elizabeth Anne Broderick (Betty). The court quashed the People’s subpoenas on the grounds they violated Betty’s state constitutional privilege against self-incrimination. We issued the order to show cause. Because we conclude the self-incrimination privilege does not extend to the documents sought, we grant the petition. However, because we conclude the court should have more closely examined whether specific material from each doctor was protected under Betty’s psychotherapist-patient privilege, we remand the matter to the superior court for further hearing.

Background

Betty is charged with two counts of murder in connection with the shooting deaths of her former husband, Daniel Broderick (Daniel), and his new wife, Linda Broderick (Linda). Betty’s first trial ended in a mistrial when the jury was unable to reach unanimous verdicts. A second jury trial is scheduled for August 1991.

Before Daniel’s and Linda’s deaths, Betty and Daniel had been involved in an acrimonious dissolution…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.