Smith v. Super. Ct. CA4/2

DISCUSSION

Trial courts have little discretion to deny a request for post-conviction discovery

under Penal Code section 1054.9. (See Catlin v. Superior Court (2011) 51 Cal.4th 300.)

As the statute does not provide for representation by counsel (cf. Pen. Code, § 1405,

which does provide for the appointment of counsel when a defendant seeks DNA testing),

courts should not impose unnecessary procedural bars. While it is not entirely clear how

petitioner presented his request to the trial court, we are persuaded that he is entitled to a

point-by-point determination on the merits of his requests.

We are not persuaded that the statute requires petitioner to first request discovery

from the People, and at this point, given the time which has been expended, it seems

preferable in any event to place the matter before the trial court for a final resolution

rather than to inject additional delay.

We do not mean that trial courts are obliged to rule on requests that do not meet

the statutory requirements, but we note that petitioner has now established that he cannot

obtain the desired materials from trial counsel. Insofar as he requests materials to which

he would not have…