Opinion ID: 1375029
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Denying Motion to Discover Other Officers' Personnel Records

Text: As described, the court denied defendant's motion to discover the records of four other police officers not present at his interrogation. It found no nexus or connection between those officers and his claim of involuntary confession that would justify discovering their personnel records. (16) Defendant contends that the court erred in so finding. He asserts that he showed the officers trained with his interrogators, and that in Memro I, supra, 38 Cal.3d 658, 686, we held that the records of those who trained or otherwise had substantial contacts with any of the four interrogating officers would be discoverable. Trial courts are granted wide discretion when ruling on a motion to discover such records. ( People v. Breaux (1991) 1 Cal.4th 281, 311 [3 Cal. Rptr.2d 81, 821 P.2d 585], quoting Pitchess v. Superior Court, supra, 11 Cal.3d 531, 535.) Here the court found that there was no sufficient connection between training sessions or other activities in which the officers had mutually participated and the circumstances surrounding the interrogation. There is nothing in the record to contradict that finding. Plainly the court did not abuse its discretion.