Case Title: P. v. Curl

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: california

Court: California Supreme Court

Date: 2009-07-08T00:00:00Z

Document:
Filed 7/8/09 
 
 
 
 
 
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA 
 
THE PEOPLE, 
) 
 
 
) 
 
Plaintiff and Respondent, 
) 
 
 
) 
S034072 
 
v. 
) 
 
 
) 
ROBERT ZANE CURL, 
) 
 
) 
Fresno County 
 
Defendant  and Appellant. 
) 
Super. Ct. No. 380748-4 
 ___________________________________ ) 
 
ORDER MODIFYING OPINION 
THE COURT: 
The opinion herein, filed on May 18, 2009, appearing at 46 Cal.4th 339, is 
modified as follows: 
Footnote 16 on page 360 is modified to read:   
We deny defendant’s request that we judicially notice a report of the 1989-1990 Los 
Angeles County Grand Jury regarding the involvement of jailhouse informants in the 
criminal justice system in Los Angeles County.  Because defendant failed to establish an 
adequate foundation that DeSoto was the type of informant covered by the report (by, for 
example, presenting evidence he was a repeat inmate informant), the report is irrelevant.  
(Mangini v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. (1994) 7 Cal.4th 1057, 1063 [31 Cal.Rptr.2d 
358, 875 P.2d 73] [“Although a court may judicially notice a variety of matters (Evid. 
Code, § 450 et seq.), only relevant material may be noticed.”].)   
This modification does not affect the judgment.