GGPDE_2020-36_Defense_Delivery_of_Evidence_2164177

JACKIE LACEY DISTRICT ATTORNEY LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE ONEMINUTE BRIEF COPYRIGHT © 2020 LOS ANGELES COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY’S OFFICE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. MAY BE REPRODUCED FOR NON -COMMERCIAL PROSECUTORIAL, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY . 1MB@da.lacounty.gov NUMBER : 2020-36 DATE : 10-22-20 BY: Devallis Rutledge TOPIC : Defense Delivery of Evidence ISSUE : What if the defense attorney comes into possession of the fruits, instrumentalities or evidence of a crime? Occasionally , a criminal defendant or a third party turn s over weapons, stolen property, video, writings or other incriminating evidence of a crime to the defense attorney. Should the attorney conceal the evidence, to avoid helping the prosecution ? (No.) Or must the defense attorney deliver the evidence to the prosecutor, or to the court to be disclosed to the prosecution? (Yes.) “A person who, knowing that any matter or thing is about to be produced in evidence upon a trial or investigation authorized by law, willfully destroys, erases or conceals the same, with the intent to prevent it from being produced, is guilty of a misdemeanor.” PC § 135 (condensed). PC § 32 provides that an accessory to another’s felony is him/herself guilty of felony, and “Concealment of a weapon used by the principal in the commission of a felony may constitute the actus reus of the offense. ” People v. Wilson (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 271, 275. In some circumstances, withholding evidence of a crime is a felony -wobbler. PC § 153. “It has been held an abuse of a lawyer’s professional responsibility knowingly to take possession of and secrete the instrumentalities of a crime. A defendant in a criminal case may not permanently sequester physical evidence such as a weapon or other article used in the pe rpetration of a crime by delivering it to his attorney .” People v. Lee (1970) 3 Cal.App.3d 514, 526 (citing PC § 135). ● The prosecutor need not (but may and sometimes should) make a formal request for disclosure of all physical evidence in the possession of defense counsel or his/her agents. The defense has an absolute, affirmative duty to take steps to deliver the evidence : This information was current as of publication date. It is not intended as legal advice. It is recommended that readers check for subsequent developments, and consult legal advisors to ensure currency after publication. Local policies and procedures regarding application should be observed. LADA ONE -MINUTE BRIEF NO. 20 20-36 PAGE 2 “If counsel or an agent of counsel chooses to remove, possess or alter physical evidence pertaining to the crime, counsel must imme diately inform the court of the action. The court … must … ensure that the prosecution has timely access to physical evidence possessed by the defense and timely information about alteration of any evidence. “The obligation to provide the prosecution with access to physical evidence and information about its alteration is absolute . The legal obligations should be self-executing and no motion by the prosecution or order by the court should be required to enforc e them.” People v. Superior Court (Fairbank) (1987) 192 Cal.App. 3d 32, 39 -40. ● Neither the attorney -client privilege in Evidence Code § 954 nor either constitutional privilege against compelled self -incrimination justifies concealing non -testimonial evidence: “[W]e cannot extend the attorney -client privilege so far that it renders evidence immune from discovery and admission merely because the defense seizes it first . … [W]henever defense counsel removes or alters evidence, the statutory privilege does not bar revelation of the original location or condition of the evidence in question.” People v. Meredith (1981) 29 Cal.3d 682, 686, 695. And see discussion and cases cited in Izazaga v. Superior Court (1991) 54 Cal.3d 356, 365-72, explaining why neither the Fifth Amendment privilege nor its counterpart in California Constitution, Article 1, § 15, is violated by defense disclosure of nontestimonial evidence . ● Within the discovery statutes, PC § 1054.4 expressly provides that “Nothing in this chapter shall be construed as limiting any law enforcement or prosecuting agency from obtaining nontestimonial evidence to the extent permitted by law on the effective date of this section.” This statute has been held to require defense counsel to deliver physical evidence in his/her possession to the prosecution or to the court , as mandated by the various authorities cited above. People v. Sanchez (1994) 24 Cal.App.4th 1012, 1025 -28. The refusal to do so upon court order is a punishable contempt. CCP § 12 19(a); Zimmerman v. Superior Court (2013) 220 Cal.App.4th 389, 396-403 (upholding defense attorney’s sentence to custody). BOTTOM LINE : Physical evidence of a crime that is removed, altered or held by defense counsel must