Posted On: April 22, 2008 by Mary Frances Prevost

CALIFORNIA EVIDENCE - TESTIMONY RE: EVIDENCE BEING SENT TO DEFENSE LABORATORY

A Police expert testified that she did not test blood on a ring because it would have consumed it in case it had to be tested again, and that the evidence had been "released to a defense lab." Defense counsel objected, but not on the grounds raised on appeal.

Held, even if claims are cognizable, the testimony did not violate the work product privilege as it applies to criminal cases (only "core" work product protected; see Garcia v. Superior Court (2007) 42 Cal.4th 63, 63, fn. 2).

The Court refuses to reach constitutional issues regarding the admission of the testimony because trial counsel did not object on constitutional grounds, leaving a writ of Habeas Corpus open on that issue.
.
People v. Zamudio (Ca. Sup. Ct., 4/21/08, S074414) 08 C.D.O.S. 4544

san diego sheriff's crime lab, san diego police department crime lab, crime lab in san diego, dui crime lab in san diego, california crime lab, california criminal defense lawyer, california criminal defense attorney