In Re Francisco M.

The law has long recognized that “[t]he duty to disclose knowledge of crime rests upon all citizens. It is so vital that one known to be innocent may be detained, in the absence of bail, as a material witness.” (Stein v. New York (1953) 346 U.S. 156, 184 [ 73 S.Ct. 1077, 1092 , 97 L.Ed. 1522 ], fn. omitted; see Barry v. United States ex rel. Cunningham (1929) 279 U.S. 597, 616-618 [ 49 S.Ct. 452, 456-457 , 73 L.Ed. 867 ].) In California, as applicable to witnesses deemed material for trial, this principle is embodied in Penal Code section 1332. Under that section, on an appropriate sworn showing, a trial court may detain a material witness when it finds good cause to believe that the witness will not attend the trial and testify. However, the statute does not confer unfettered discretion to incarcerate a material witness. In article I, section 10, the California Constitution states in relevant part that “[witnesses may not be unreasonably detained.”

In this case we consider petitions for writ of habeas corpus filed by two minors, declared material witnesses and detained under section 1332 in a special circumstance murder prosecution. They allege, among other things, that…