Murray v. Super. Ct.
Petitioner Michael Murray (Murray), a criminal defendant below, seeks extraordinary relief from the trial court’s order quashing a subpoena duces tecum (SDT) which defense counsel had issued and which was served upon a third party. The People filed a motion to quash the SDT, asserting the legal position that a third party individual could not be served with an SDT initiated by the defendant in a criminal case. After three hearings, on June 28, 2012, the court granted the motion to quash, concluding that Penal Code section 1326 “does not authorize the defense to issue subpoenas to individuals, non-businesses.”[1]

Comments on Murray v. Super. Ct.

Post Reply

Search thread for Go ►

Download thread as textHTMLGo ►

• 0/5
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5

Quick Reply

Your Name:
Your Comment: Click an emoji to insert it into your message. You may use BB Codes in your message.
Spam Prevention:

Submit Advanced