This decision is BONKERS. Hammon is the world’s most stupidest case ever. It says that you cannot get psych records until trial because the trial court is the best entity to determine their relevance and to weigh the competing rights.
Now, the First District has come out to say that this rule applies to SDT’d facebook records. I.e. you may be entitled to the records at trial but not pretrial. Perhaps the stupidest part of this opinion is that in a footnote the court recognizes that at oral argument the defense pointed out that the motion was made the day before trial, and the court said that this was not considered “trial.” Practically speaking, this means that mid-trial, after a witness testifies, the court has to review thousands of pages of records for relevant messages/posts, and you have to do the same for those disclosed. Then what, the jury takes weeks off while you do this? This decision demonstrates the problem with having appellate court judges (read: inexperienced law clerks) decide discovery issues when they have no idea how the mechanics and practicalities of trial work.
I also think that anyone challenging Hammon/this case should argue that even if the right does not attach “pretrial” generally, it should attach when you are in the px court. You have the right to cross-examine and impeach a witness at px. The documents would be necessary to perfect that right. The recent Brady-right-at-px case (People v. Gutierrez (2013) 214 Cal.App.4th 343) further supports the idea that you should be entitled to discovery to enjoy your constitutional rights at px because if you have the right to exculpatory evidence from a prosecutor at px, you have the right to exculpatory evidence in the hands of a third party at a px. A px judge is in the same posture to weigh the interests as a trial court judge.
#terrible/ridiculous
The post Hammon now applies to social media SDTs (barf) appeared first on juicejusticeandcorgis.