Moises Galindo, Petitioner v. the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Respondent; City of Los Angeles Police…

Summary

The court held that a defendant may file a Pitchess motion before a preliminary hearing, but the pending motion does not automatically require postponement of the hearing over the prosecution's objection. It further held that denying the motion in this case did not deprive petitioner of effective assistance of counsel because the requested discovery was unlikely to affect the probable-cause determination and obtaining it would cause delay inconsistent with the rights to a prompt preliminary hearing. The court affirmed denial of the writ of mandate and permitted petitioner to renew the motion for trial purposes. Justice Werdegar, concurring, agreed with the result but would characterize continuance decisions as a discretionary balancing of speedy-hearing and fair-hearing interests rather than as categorically precluding prehearing discovery or its use at the hearing.