Yannacone v. Municipal Court of City and County of San Francisco

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeals
Citation34 Cal.Rptr. 838,222 Cal.App.2d 72
Decision Date05 November 1963
PartiesJohn J. YANNACONE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. The MUNICIPAL COURT OF the CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant and Respondent, The PEOPLE of the State of California, Real Party in Interest and Respondent. Civ. 21094.

William K. Day, San Francisco, for appellant.

Stanley Mosk, Atty. Gen., Albert W. Harris, Jr., Eric Collins, Deputy Attys. Gen., San Francisco, for respondent.

DRAPER, Presiding Justice.

Petitioner is charged with misdemeanor manslaughter (Pen.Code, § 192, subd. 3[b]). Upon denial of his request for pretrial discovery in the municipal court, he sought mandamus in the superior court. After hearing, alternative writ was discharged and peremptory writ denied. Petitioner appeals.

A truck driven by petitioner collided with a Southern Pacific train. Petitioner's fellow employee, riding in the truck, was killed. This prosecution for manslaughter followed.

Petitioner alleges that: he and the heirs of the deceased fellow employee have filed civil actions against the railroad company; he is informed that Southern Pacific has investigated the accident; he believes that the interests of the company are similar to those of the prosecution; he infers that the railroad would make available to the prosecution only information helpful to it; 'therefore, to insure a fair trial defendant should have access to the total investigative materials as developed by the Southern Pacific Company.' He prays 'issuance of a subpena duces tecum to the Southern Pacific Company, to appear at a special hearing prior to trial, and * * * produce their entire investigative file, reports, and statements covering the accident in question.'

Even California's liberal criminal discovery rules fail to encompass the relief here sought. In a proper case, one charged with crime may, before trial, inspect: statements of his own in possession of the prosecution, whether signed, unsigned, or on recording tapes; real evidence or reports of state officers' examination thereof; and statements of persons expected to be prosecution witnesses at trial. He may compel disclosure of the names and addresses of eyewitnesses of an alleged crime. (Defense counsel, at oral argument, conceded that he has asked only the names and addresses of the engineer and a flagman, which have been furnished to him). He may have the prosecution restrained from interfering with his counsel's right to interview witnesses (see decisions reviewed in People v. Cooper, 53 Cal.2d 755, 769-770, 3 Cal.Rptr. 148, 349 P.2d 964).

But 'he does have to show some better cause for inspection than a mere desire for * * * all information which has been obtained by the People in their investigation', and such a 'blanket request' will be denied (id...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • People v. Lindsay
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • May 27, 1964
    ...23 Cal.Rptr. 148, 349 P.2d 964; Jones v. Superior Court, 58 Cal.2d 56, 58-60, 22 Cal.Rptr. 879, 372 P.2d 919; Yannacone v. Municipal Court, 222 A.C.A. 80, 81-82, 34 Cal.Rptr. 838.) But a defendant has to show some better cause for inspection than a mere desire for the information which has ......
  • Kardy v. Shook
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • February 15, 1965
    ...75 L.Ed. 1436; Ex parte Denton, 266 Ala. 279, 96 So.2d 296; Bailey v. State, 227 Ark. 889, 302 S.W.2d 796, 798; Yannacone v. Municipal Court, 222 Cal.App.2d 72, 34 Cal.Rptr. 838; Kelly v. People, 121 Colo. 243, 215 P.2d 336, 344; McLane v. State of Georgia, 4 Ga. 335; State v. Zarlenga, 14 ......
  • Pacific Lighting Leasing Co. v. Superior Court
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • July 27, 1976
    ...no right to take a deposition other than in compliance with the requirements of Penal Code sections 1335--1337. Yannacone v. Municipal Court, 222 Cal.App.2d 72, 34 Cal.Rptr. 838, affirmed the denial of the issuance of a subpoena duces tecum sought by defendant in a manslaughter case to requ......
  • People v. Municipal Court (Runyan)
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • January 20, 1978
    ...520, 524, 59 Cal.Rptr. 478; People v. Mersino (1965) 237 Cal.App.2d 265, 269, 46 Cal.Rptr. 821; Yannacone v. Municipal Court (1963) 222 Cal.App.2d 72, 74-75, 34 Cal.Rptr. 838; see generally Comment, Depositions as a Means of Criminal Discovery, 7 U.S.F.L.Rev. It is argued, however, that a r......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT