McGinnis v Super. Court
Annotate this CaseIn 1998, petitioner was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder. The court of appeal affirmed and, in 2007, denied a habeas petition. In 2015, petitioner sought post-conviction production of “discovery materials” from the Alameda County District Attorney, Penal Code 1054.9. Petitioner stated that he could not obtain the documents from his trial counsel. The court denied the motion, finding that he had not made good faith efforts to obtain the documents, although his trial counsel was deceased. Petitioner filed another motion to which he attached a letter from appellate counsel saying she did not have the materials. With the motion pending, the district attorney agreed to address the request, stating that petitioner would be required to pay for copying. Petitioner moved for waiver of copying costs, with a declaration attesting that he is “indigent.” “The court denied the motion, stating that the statute requires copying costs be “borne or reimbursed” by petitioner. The district attorney advised that copying would cost $122.80 and declined to waive the cost. The court of appeal denied a mandamus petition. The California Supreme Court returned the case. The court of appeal then held that if a moving party demonstrates entitlement to postconviction discovery but is unable to pay copying costs, the court must determine if he is indigent and, if so, fashion a reimbursement plan or other means to permit discovery to proceed.
Sign up for free summaries delivered directly to your inbox. Learn More › You already receive new opinion summaries from California Courts of Appeal. Did you know we offer summary newsletters for even more practice areas and jurisdictions? Explore them here.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.