Opinion ID: 2639434
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Referee's Findings: Kathy Erbe

Text: Petitioner contends that his conviction is unconstitutional because the prosecution withheld evidence of a conversation it had with Kathy Erbe, in which she claimed that Joe and Linda Crespin testified falsely at petitioner's jury trial. The referee found that Kathy Erbe was the epitome of noncredibility. He found that she testified at the reference hearing in a confused manner, made assertions that could not possibly be true, and that her obsession with satanic cults affected her perception and memory. [6] Just as important, Erbe's claims were vehemently denied by Joe and Linda Crespin, district attorney investigator Ernie Birtwell, and witnesses Sonia and Kip Miller, all of whom the referee found substantially more credible than Erbe. The referee found that none of the statements attributed by Erbe to Joe and Linda Crespin were ever made. These factual findings are entitled to great deference, especially as they required the resolution of witness credibility. ( In re Malone, supra, 12 Cal.4th at p. 946, 50 Cal.Rptr.2d 281, 911 P.2d 468.) The referee's findings also are supported by substantial evidence. Because Erbe provided no relevant or material information to the prosecution, it follows that the prosecution had no duty to disclose such information to the defense. ( Brady v. Maryland (1963) 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215.) We therefore reject petitioner's contentions regarding Kathy Erbe.