Geilim

Geilim v. Superior Court

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 1087·234 Cal. App. 3d 166·285 Cal. Rptr. 602·91 Daily Journal DAR 11622·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7640
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 20, 1991B058220California3,929 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hinz, J.

Introduction

Petitioner Gilbert R. Geilim, attorney at law, for his clients and himself, (Geilim) petitions for writ of mandate/prohibition to restrain and prohibit the superior court from disclosing to the People (unsealing) the items seized pursuant to a search warrant of his law office until after a hearing to determine whether such items or a portion of such items are privileged.

This court denied Geilim’s petition. However, the California Supreme Court granted Geilim’s petition for review and transferred the matter back to this division. Pursuant to the Supreme Court’s directions, we vacated our order denying mandate or prohibition and issued an alternative writ.

The petition for the writ is granted.

Factual and Proceedural Backround

Property was seized from the law offices of Geilim pursuant to a search warrant issued upon a finding of probable cause supported by affidavit of an Insurance Fraud/Staged Collision Investigator of the California Highway Patrol (CHP). The search warrant authorized search of Geilim’s law offices at 6500 Wilshire Boulevard in Los Angeles and seizure of the following: “1. Evidence of association or employment between the named law…

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.