Opinion

People v. Zamora

  • 28 Cal. 3d 88
  • 167 Cal. Rptr. 573
  • 615 P.2d 1361
  • 1980 Cal. LEXIS 210
Court
California Supreme Court
Filed
Aug 28, 1980
Status
Published
Author
Bird
On the bench
Tobriner, Manuel, Bird
Cited by
104 cases
Authority
More cited than 6.2%

The opinion

BIRD, C. J., Concurring and Dissenting.

I concur in the judgment and, for the sole purpose of achieving a single majority position to guide the trial court on remand, I join in the instructional directions to the trial court set forth in Justice Tobriner’s opinion. However, I respectfully disagree with the reasoning of the lead opinion since it would effectively foreclose dismissal as a sanction in any case which involved the wholesale destruction of discoverable evidence. As a result, the lesson the police will draw from this decision is that if they maliciously destroy all the records which contain discoverable materials at one time, they do not have to fear any sanctions or reprisals. However, if they refuse on a case by case basis to disclose discoverable records, they face the possibility of dismissal of their case and contempt of court. (See Dell M. v. Superior Court (1977) 70 Cal.App.3d 782 [ 144 Cal.Rptr. 418 ].) I cannot join in reasoning that sanctions such an illogical result.

Respondent’s petition for a rehearing was denied October 16, 1980. Clark, J., Richardson, J., and Manuel, J., were of the opinion that the petition should be granted.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.