Latest California Criminal Case Limits Inquiry Into Police Records of Bad Cops
May 26, 2013 Leave a comment
Thousands of decisions are handed down every year related to criminal appeals, this new case rules that when conducting a hearing into records pertaining to allegations of police misconduct, a trial court must examine the records itself; it may not rely on the police clerk’s assessment of the relevence of the information contained in the records. In this case Police officers attempted to arrest appellant for absconding from parole supervision. He tried to flee in his car, striking one of the officers. Defendant was charged with provocative act murder and assaulting police officers after police opened fire in response to his flight, killing a passenger in the car, it was not clear whether the defendant was DUI. Defendant filed two motions requesting information regarding complaints against a number of officers for excessive force and dishonesty. The court allowed access to some information as to several of the officers; defendant sought review. The Justices found that the trial court conducted several in camera hearings at which it placed the custodian of records under oath and asked questions regarding the content of the records. The court did not review the records unless the custodian opined the record contained discoverable material. This was error. In ruling on a Pitchess motion, the court should make a record of the files it reviewed to permit appellate review, which did not occur here, resulting in an inadequate record of the documents produced. According to a Burbank DUI Attorneys opinion, a trial court may not abdicate its responsibility to personally review the files and determine whether there is discoverable material. The criminal case was sent back to the original Judge for further review.
In this particular case the Defendant showed good cause for the trial court to conduct an in camera review of the officer’s personnel records for information related to dishonesty. A defendant seeking police personnel records must show good cause, which requires a nexus between the information and his proposed defense, including impeaching the officer’s version of events. Defendant met this threshold as to information regarding reports related to dishonesty as to four of the officers because his knowledge whether the men who approached his car were police could impact whether he intentionally assaulted/provoked them. However, there was no logical link between past complaints of use of excessive force and the proposed defense. The Court held that there was no link between any such complaints and any defense to the assault charges under the circumstances of this case.