Hubbard

Hubbard v. Superior Court

Good Law
66 Cal. App. 4th 1163·78 Cal. Rptr. 2d 819
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 1997B107598California2,642 words

Opinion

Opinion

Michael D. Bradbury, District Attorney, County of Ventura; Kevin Drescher, Deputy District Attorney, Ventura, for Real Party in Interest.

YEGAN, Associate Justice.

Here we hold that the prosecutor is not entitled to discover notes prepared by a defense investigator that relate to an interview of a "prosecution" witness unless and until the defense announces an intent to call the defense investigator as a witness. Stated another way, the defense is not required to disclose statements it obtains from prosecution witnesses that may be used to refute the prosecution's case during cross-examination.

Petitioner was charged with attempted murder and kidnapping. During the cross-examination of Tom Smith, one of the victims, defense counsel sought to establish that Smith coached Tonye Hurley, another victim, into changing her testimony. At this point, the prosecutor moved for the production of all statements obtained by the defense relating to any prosecution witness. Respondent court inquired whether a defense investigator had interviewed Ms. Hurley. Defense counsel candidly stated that Ms. Hurley had been interviewed by his investigator.

Respondent court, over the objection of…

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.