P. v. Walton
Defendant and appellant Ernest Lee Walton appeals from a judgment entered after a jury trial in which he was convicted of possession of a controlled substance, and found to have suffered a prior conviction alleged under the Three Strikes law. Walton contends that (1) the prosecutor violated his constitutional right to compulsory process by threatening to prosecute a defense witness for perjury; (2) this court should independently review a transcript of a Pitchess hearing; and (3) the trial court erred by instructing the jury in a way that it interfered with its ability to request a readback of testimony under Penal Code section 1138. Court conclude that prosecutorial misconduct interfered with Waltons right to present a witness in his defense, and that the trial court abused its discretion in connection with the Pitchess motion. On these bases, we shall reverse. Waltons third contention is moot and, in any event, meritless.
Comments on P. v. Walton