Well the public defender filed a pitchess motion because the officer put in his report that my son told him it was his alcohol which he did not. The pitchess motion was granted and all of a sudden the DA wanted to deal. Anyway he ended up getting a vop and 25 hrs community service. No license suspension and mip charges dropped. He has sworn off alcohol until over 21 and I hope he sticks to it.
I'm not sure what part a Pitchess motion played in the whole thing, but I'll guess that the state would have dealt anyway.
A Pitchess motion is a request made by a defendant in a criminal action for access to information in the personnel file of an arresting police officer. Pitchess motions can also be made in civil actions, but they are rare. ... The name “Pitchess” comes from a 1974 California Supreme Court case, Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531. The Pitchess process is now codified in California Evidence Code sections 1043-47.
The theory underlying a Pitchess motion is that a defendant should be entitled to any information that is relevant to his/her defense. If the arresting officer’s personnel file contains information that might bear on the defendant’s claim that the officer had engaged in misconduct, as a matter of fairness, the defendant should have access to that information.
Both the legislature and the courts, however, have recognized that the police officer whose records are sought has an equally compelling interest in maintaining the privacy of his/her personnel file. The Pitchess hearing process ... is designed to ensure an appropriate balance of those two competing interests.
Unless there was some reasonable belief that the officer's personnel file contained damning information regarding his truthfulness, this motion would likely have fallen flat. So, I doubt this motion is what compelled the DA to deal. he likely dealt because this is a low level case and when you have a VOP, you usually drop the low level offense in exchange for a guilty on the VOP.
- Carl