Stanton v. Superior Court

Good Law
193 Cal. App. 3d 265·1987 Cal. App. LEXIS 1889·239 Cal. Rptr. 328
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 30, 1987G005121California2,545 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallin, J.

In this case we hold the prosecution’s failure to disclose evidence material to defense cross-examination of eyewitnesses at a preliminary hearing entitles the defendant to have an element of the charged offense, gross negligence, stricken from the information, leaving the remaining charge as a misdemeanor.

Petitioner Josephine Stanton was initially charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence. (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (c)(1).) Approximately one month later the district attorney’s office received an investigative report from the civil attorney for the decedent’s family containing summaries of interviews with three eyewitnesses. Shortly thereafter, a felony complaint was filed charging Stanton with vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence (§ 192, subd. (c)(1)) and with vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence while under the influence of drugs or alcohol (§ 192, subd. (c)(3)). The misdemeanor complaint was dismissed. Stanton was held to answer only for the violation of section 192, subdivision (c) (1) following a preliminary hearing. Immediately before trial, the defense was provided a copy of the investigative report for the first time.…

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.