People v. Superior Court

Good Law
145 Cal. App. 4th 473·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1900·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15659·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 670·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 11004
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 30, 2006C051946California3,981 words

Opinion

Opinion

Robie, J.

Penal Code section 1054.9 allows persons subject to a sentence of death or life in prison without the possibility of parole to file a motion for postconviction discovery to assist in seeking a writ of habeas corpus or an order vacating the judgment. The question in this case is whether section 1054.9 requires a defendant to show, as a prerequisite to obtaining an order for discovery materials under the statute, that the requested materials actually exist and are in the possession of the prosecution and/or the relevant law enforcement authorities, or, at the very least, that a defendant has a good faith basis to so believe. As will be explained, we believe the answer to this question is “no.”

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In 1989 in Shasta County, real party in interest Robert Edward Maury was convicted of the murder of three women and sentenced to death. In 2003, the California Supreme Court affirmed his convictions and sentence. (See People v. Maury (2003) 30 Cal.4th 342 [ 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 561 , 68 P.3d 1 ].)

In August 2005, Maury filed a discovery motion pursuant to section 1054.9. He asked the court to order the prosecution to provide 22 items of discovery “to…

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.