Bowles

People v. Bowles

Good Law
129 Cal. Rptr. 3d 290·198 Cal. App. 4th 318·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 1062
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 11, 2011No. D057119California3,514 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

McIntyre, J.

In this case, we conclude that a trial court’s power to grant sanctions under Penal Code section 1054.5, subdivision (b) (section *321 1054.5(b)) based on the prosecution’s failure to disclose exculpatory evidence is limited to a circumstance where the verdict has not yet been rendered on the charged crimes and while the trial court has jurisdiction over the criminal case. (Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) Accordingly, we conclude the trial court erred by granting a new trial as a discovery sanction under section 1054.5(b) after the jury rendered its verdict on the charges against defendant and the trial court conducted the bifurcated trial on the alleged prior offenses.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On January 29, 2009, David Meyer left his unlocked bicycle by the front entrance of a Vons store located on South Santa Fe Avenue in Vista, California. (All further dates are in 2009.) When he returned, the bike was missing. The store manager saw the incident, but believed that a friend of Meyer’s had taken the bike. Sheriff’s Deputy Michael Proffitt responded to the theft report and reviewed the security video with the store manager. The time…

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.