Gutierrez

People v. Gutierrez

Good Law
112 Cal. App. 4th 1463·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1636·2003 Daily Journal DAR 11969·6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 138·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9518
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 30, 2003No. B160082California3,870 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Aldrich, J.

*1468 Opinion

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Christopher Anthony Gutierrez was convicted by a jury of forcible oral copulation and forcible sexual penetration with a foreign object while acting in concert. Prior to trial, Gutierrez moved for Pitchess 1 disclosure of information in the personnel records of the two officers who arrested him. The trial court declined to conduct an in camera hearing, finding Gutierrez had failed to establish good cause as required by Evidence Code section 1043, subdivision (b)(3).

Gutierrez contends that the statutory Pitchess framework, as applied in criminal cases, conflicts with the principles expressed in Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83 [ 10 L.Ed.2d 215 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 ], in violation of his due process rights. According to Gutierrez, the statutory Pitchess procedures (1) impermissibly interfere with the prosecutor’s duty to ascertain and disclose material, exculpatory evidence to the defense, and (2) improperly place upon the defendant the burden of establishing good cause for Brady disclosure. Gutierrez further contends that the trial court erred by admitting evidence of his prior conviction pursuant to Evidence Code section 1108, a statute…

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.