Can You Be Required to Pay for Discovery

[AJAlegria]

My question involves traffic court in the State of: California
I got a speeding ticket in Placer county and I had my friend send out my discovery request about 2 weeks ago. Today I got a letter from the Roseville City Attourney's office saying that in order to receive the requested information I have to send payment of $6.40 to cover the cost of the cd with,i'm assuming, the officers notes/recording of the pull-over.

Does this sound right to anyone? It sure doesn't sound right to me. I would argue that if they choose to have any notes presented in CD form rather than text, that is their decision not mine. Thus, making the burden to cover that cost theirs, and not mine.

[That Guy]

If you want copies, of any form or format, you have to pay if payment is requested!

The People comply with section 1054.1 by affording the defendant an opportunity to examine, inspect, or copy the discoverable items. A nonindigent defendant may receive at his or her own expense copies of discovery made available by the People.

Schaffer v. Superior Court, 185 Cal. App. 4th 1235 - Cal: Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate Dist., 6th Div 2011

Thousands of defendant's requests for discovery are rejected by D.A.s statewide every year... You get yours to respond and you're complaining about $6.40???

I would argue that if they choose to have any notes presented in CD form rather than text, that is their decision not mine. Thus, making the burden to cover that cost theirs, and not mine.

And clearly your argument would fail simply because how else would you suggest they preserve or maintain voice recordings?

You want them transcribed? That's fine too but you'll have to pay for transcription services as those are not free either!

You do have a third alternative, that is to wait until the trial to hear the recording and then decide if it benefits you in any way, of course by waiting that long, you maybe allowing that recording to be the bomb that blows up your case for you!

[AJAlegria]

Yeah. I am complaining a bit. But only because the last discovery request I sent out resulted in full cooperation with no request for payment. As someone who is not a legal expert (the whole reason many of us use this website) this is a natural reaction/question to anyone who has a respectable level of curiosity.

Obviously I have no problem paying such a low fee for the level of information I will get back. The important issue wasn't the cost but the principle.

Thanks for answering the question.

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah. I am complaining a bit. But only because the last discovery request I sent out resulted in full cooperation with no request for payment. As someone who is not a legal expert (the whole reason many of us use this website) this is a natural reaction/question to anyone who has a respectable level of curiosity.

Obviously I have no problem paying such a low fee for the level of information I will get back. The important issue wasn't the cost but the principle.

Thanks for answering the question.

[That Guy]

But only because the last discovery request I sent out resulted in full cooperation with no request for payment.

I'll bet you $6.40 that the last discovery request had no actual recording to request or provide!

The important issue wasn't the cost but the principle.

And the principle -as it is explained in that case I cited (and if you had read it you would have seen this in the first paragraph)- is "Discovery, is part of your attempt to defend yourself, you are clearly not an indigent defendant and as such, those costs are yours to pay". The fact that you got one freebie does not entitle you to any more.

But in case the principle you were speaking of was something else, let me address that part as well; the state of California would be in a much better financial state if it didn't bow down to every resident who claimed entitlement to some benefit or another. One example is the court system... The court system and its budget would not be at such a huge deficit if some people did not abuse the system and try to squeeze it past every drop its got.

[quirkyquark]

Thousands of defendant's requests for discovery are rejected by D.A.s statewide every year... You get yours to respond and you're complaining about $6.40???

WOW! Amazing reaction from OP -- looking a gift horse in the mouth!

As TG stated, being asked for a nominal sum to cover media (and even paper copies) is perfectly legal and fair. If you have time to burn, you can certainly insist on going over to the city attorney's office and/or the citing agency's office and "inspecting" everything for no fee.

[That Guy]

WOW! Amazing reaction from OP -- looking a gift horse in the mouth!

As TG stated, being asked for a nominal sum to cover media (and even paper copies) is perfectly legal and fair. If you have time to burn, you can certainly insist on going over to the city attorney's office and/or the citing agency's office and "inspecting" everything for no fee.

I'm telling you Quirky... This "entitlement" thing that everybody is developing... Its today's version of what crack was in the 1990s; you take one hit, you're done.

And the BIGGER kicker is, this guy had submitted 2 discovery requests, one to the LEA and one to the D.A....
How often do both requests get -not only the courtesy of a reply- but the other party's full cooperation and full disclosure?
When he posted ^this^ question, he'd already received a packet from the LEA & was due his 2nd packet from the D.A. pending payment of $6.40!
Heck, he was 31mph over the limit, his fine, clearly was @ $480... Pretend it was $486.40... You won't know the difference!


Never heard back from him... Who knows, the presiding judge at his arraignment had warned him about a VC 13200 suspension if convicted... Suggested it would be for 6 months (instead of the 30 days it is limited by statute) . Fair, legal or fascist... I don't care what anyone says, if that was me, there is no other reasonable conclusion I could come up with other than I'm going to get reamed... But hey, stranger things have happened!

Maybe he'll read this and come back to update us... Maybe he won, got his case dismissed! who am I to suggest that he was likely to lose! After all, it was me who told him "when there is a will, there is a way"... (Though I said it about something completely different).

His two other threads (total of 21 posts + 3 posts = 24 posts for both) if you're up for 'em:

Traffic Survey Where I Was Cited is More Than 5 Years Old. Can the Case Be Dismissed

22349 vs 22350 Concerning Speed Trap Defense