P. v. Gallegos
Following a jury trial, appellant was found guilty of possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)). She was granted probation pursuant to Proposition 36.
The facts underlying the crime may be briefly stated as appellant merely requests we review the trial court’s in camera hearing conducted pursuant to Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). Simply put, appellant was observed by a sheriff’s deputy stumbling down the street. The deputy watched as appellant placed a small baggie in her sock. The baggie contained methamphetamine. Appellant testified in her defense that the deputy lied about finding drugs on her person.
In response to appellant’s Pitchess motion, the trial court found the defense was entitled to an in camera hearing to review any civilian complaints in the deputy’s personnel record that alleged the arresting deputy falsified reports or planted evidence. After conducting the review, the trial court found no discoverable information.
Comments on P. v. Gallegos