Detrice Garmon v. County of Los Angeles

Good Law
828 F.3d 837·2016 WL 3606745·2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 12381
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 5, 201612-55109California4,146 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wilken, J.

Plaintiff-Appellant Detrice Garmon was an alibi witness in her son’s murder trial. Because she was scheduled to undergo brain surgery with an uncertain outcome, her deposition was taken pursuant to state court procedure. She authorized Defendant-Appellee Southern California Perma-nente Medical Group (“Kaiser”) to disclose to the prosecution medical records related to her brain tumor. The next day, Defendant-Appellee Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney Michele Hanisee, the lead prosecutor, issued a subpoena duces tecum to Kaiser instead requesting all of Garmon’s medical records. Hanisee provided a declaration in support of the application for the subpoena duces tecum, erroneously representing that Garmon was the murder victim in her son’s trial. Garmon ultimately testified at her son’s trial, and Hanisee used Garmon’s medical records from Kaiser to undermine Garmon’s credibility.

Garmon, acting pro se, filed a complaint in district court for monetary damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and several state law causes of action against Hanisee and Kaiser, and against Defendants-Appellees Steve Cooley, the Los Angeles County District Attorney at the time of the trial, and…

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.