P. v. Naya
Horacio Naya was convicted by jury of one count of selling, transporting or offering cocaine base for sale (Health & Saf. Code, 11352, subd. (a)). The trial court found to be true the allegations that he had suffered a prior conviction of a narcotics-related offense within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a) and three prior prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). It sentenced appellant to a state prison term of 11 years.
In a previous appeal from that judgment, we concluded that the trial court erred in failing to conduct an in camera Pitchess[2]hearing to determine whether there were any relevant, discoverable personnel records of the two police officers involved in appellants drug arrest. On remand, the trial court conducted the in camera hearing and found relevant records, which it ordered produced to the defense. Appellant thereafter filed a motion for new trial, arguing that the failure to have received the newly produced Pitchess discovery for use at trial prejudiced him and entitled him to a new trial. The trial court denied the motion. Appellant now appeals from the denial of this motion, contending that the trial court abused its discretion. Court affirm.
Comments on P. v. Naya