Honore

Honore v. Superior Court

Good Law
1969 Cal. LEXIS 323·70 Cal. 2d 162·74 Cal. Rptr. 233·449 P.2d 169
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 20, 1969S. F. No. 22618California2,783 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Sullivan, J.

Petitioners are charged by separate informations 1 in the respondent court with possession of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11530). They seek a writ of prohibition to compel respondent court to grant pretrial discovery of the name of a confidential informant and to restrain said court from taking further proceedings in their respective criminal actions until the identity of the informant has been disclosed. We issued an alternative writ of prohibition. We have concluded that although in seeking prohibition petitioners have mistaken their remedy, they have nevertheless made out a ease entitling them to mandate to *165 enforce discovery. Accordingly, we treat the petition as one for mandate (see Powell v. Superior Court (1957) 48 Cal.2d 704, 705 [ 312 P.2d 698 ]; DeLosa v. Superior Court (1958) 166 Cal.App.2d 1, 2 [ 332 P.2d 390 ]) and we order the issuance of a peremptory writ.

On February 18, 1968, about 5 :30 a.m. defendant Charlye Ann Honoré was taken into custody by the Richmond (Contra Costa County) police on a charge unrelated to those now pending. At the hearing below Richmond Police Officer Rufus Horton, assigned to the vice squad, testified that about 3 p.m. on…

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.