People v. Davis
172 Cal. Rptr. 3d 714
Cal. Ct. App.2014Background
- Davis was convicted in 2000 of first degree burglary with four prior first degree burglary priors, receiving 25 years to life.
- This court affirmed the judgment in 2003 (Davis I).
- In 2012 the DA moved for discovery of Officer Walker’s personnel records under Brady and Pitchess; court reviewed in camera and found no material Brady evidence.
- Davis sought independent appellate review of the Walker file and a writ to compel a new Brady hearing.
- The October 1, 2012 order denied production and found no Brady material; Davis appealed and petitioned for mandate.
- This opinion concludes the appeal is dismissed and the mandamus petition denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Davis may appeal the post-judgment Brady order | Davis seeks appellate review of Brady material. | People contend the order is not appealable. | Appeal dismissed; no appealable post-judgment Brady order identified. |
| Whether the October 1, 2012 order affected Davis's substantial rights | Order denied Brady material; Davis had right to participate. | No right to post-judgment Pitchess discovery for a convicted defendant; no participation needed. | Order did not affect substantial rights; not appealable. |
| Whether Davis was entitled to participate in the Brady hearing or obtain relief by mandamus | Davis was denied due process and should have a new hearing with counsel. | Prosecution Pitchess procedure does not require defendant participation; mandamus improper. | Mandate petition denied; no ministerial duty shown. |
| Whether Totari or other authorities support appellate reach of post-judgment Brady rulings | Totari supports appeal from post-judgment denial. | Totals do not authorize; not analogous. | Totari not controlling; no right to appeal here. |
Key Cases Cited
- City of Los Angeles v. Superior Court, 29 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 2002) (Brady materiality and ongoing prosecutorial duty to disclose)
- Pitchess v. Superior Court, 11 Cal.3d 531 (Cal. 1974) (Foundation for police personnel file discovery)
- Kennedy v. Superior Court, 145 Cal.App.4th 359 (Cal. App. 2006) (Post-judgment discovery limits; Pitchess procedure context)
- Totari, 28 Cal.4th 876 (Cal. 2002) (Appealability of post-judgment orders; immigration consequences context)
- Alford v. Superior Court, 29 Cal.4th 1033 (Cal. 2003) (People not entitled to participate in defense Pitchess motions; notice principles)
- People v. Picklesimer, 48 Cal.4th 330 (Cal. 2010) (Mandamus standards and limitations on post-judgment relief)
- In re Steele, 32 Cal.4th 682 (Cal. 2004) (Postjudgment discovery limitations; context for §1054.9)
- Myles, 53 Cal.4th 1181 (Cal. 2012) (Direct death-penalty appeal; Brady material discussion)