People v. Ayala CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 24, 2014G048613California730 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

“Although the custodian of records was required to submit for review only those documents that were potentially responsive to the discovery request, our Supreme Court has directed that ‘[t]he custodian should be prepared to state in chambers and for the record what other documents (or category of documents) not presented to the court were included in the complete personnel record, and why those were deemed irrelevant or otherwise nonresponsive to the defendant’s Pitchess motion.’ [Citation.] Moreover, ‘if the custodian has any doubt whether a particular document is relevant, he or she should present it to the trial court.’ [Citation.] [¶] Accordingly, in cases such as this where the custodian of records does not produce the entire personnel file for the court’s review, he or she must establish on the record what documents or category of documents were included in the complete personnel file. In addition, if it is not readily apparent from the

3 nature of the documents that they are nonresponsive or irrelevant to the discovery request, the custodian must explain his or her decision to withhold them. Absent this information, the court cannot adequately assess the…

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.