Loading…
The procedure for disclosure of Orange County Sheriff's Department evidence audit records, Remedy system printouts and associated reports in criminal proceedings: the court adopts the stipulation of the Sheriff's Department, County Counsel, the District Attorney and the defense offices (attached), under which, in place of a Pitchess motion, the District Attorney gives the Sheriff's Department notice of a case and the Department compiles the records for disclosure, with personal identifying information protected; the order is a standing order for all criminal proceedings.
California > Fourth Appellate District > Orange County > Superior Court of California, County of Orange
Superior Court of California County of Orange Chambers of KIRK H. NAKAMURA PRESIDING JUDGE 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST SANTA ANA, CA 92701 Administrative Order No 20/24 Procedure for Disclosure of Evidence Audit Records This Order establishes the procedure for the disclosure of evidence audit records in relation to a criminal proceeding. The Court adopts the stipulation entered by the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, by and through its attorneys, the Orange County Counsel’s Office, the Orange County District Attorney, and the Orange County Public Defender regarding disclosure of documents pertaining to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department “Evidence Audit” records, Remedy system printouts, and Orange County Sheriff’s Department reports (“DRs”) associated with entries in the Evidence Audit Records and incorporates it by reference into this Order (“the Stipulation”). The process described in the Stipulation is equally available to other defense counsel upon agreement to be bound by the terms of the applicable protective order as set forth by the stipulation. A copy of the Stipulation is attached hereto. This Order does not prevent any party from seeking records otherwise permitted under law. This Order may be considered a “standing order” and is applicable to all criminal proceedings in the Orange County Superior Court. This Order is effective immediately and shall remain in effect until modified by further Order of the Court. IT IS SO ORDERED. 10/15/20 Date Kirk H. Nakamura Presiding Judge [Stamp: ORIGINAL] SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCLOSURE OF EVIDENCE AUDIT RECORDS, REMEDY RECORD PRINTOUTS AND ASSOCIATED REPORTS STIPULATION 1. This stipulation is entered into between the Orange County Sheriff’s Department, by and through its attorneys, the Orange County Counsel’s Office, the Orange County District Attorney and the Orange County Public Defender. The process described herein, however, is equally available to other defense counsel upon agreement to be bound by the terms of the applicable protective order below. 2. This stipulation covers documents pertaining to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department “Evidence Audit” records, Remedy system printouts, and Orange County Sheriff’s Department reports (“DRs”) associated with entries in the Evidence Audit Records. 3. This stipulation is intended to streamline the process for parties to criminal proceedings to obtain these records while still meeting each signatory’s respective legal obligations and protecting confidential information produced via this stipulation. 4. In lieu of the Sheriff’s Department requiring a Pitchess motion from the District Attorney’s Office or Public Defender’s Office (including Alternates and Associates) for the Evidence Audit Records, the parties stipulate to the following process: a. As a case arises for which the District Attorney would have reason to disclose Evidence Audit Records, Remedy system printouts and DRs, including pursuant to Penal Code section 1054, et seq., they may provide notice of the same to the Orange County Sheriff’s Department at a designated contact with information sufficient to identify the peace officer or officers. b. Upon receipt, the Orange County Sheriff’s Department will compile Evidence Audit Records, Remedy system printouts, and DRs associated with the Evidence Audit Records entries related to the peace officer or officers specifically identified by the District Attorney’s Office. c. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department will provide responsive Evidence Audit Records, Remedy system printouts, and associated DRs to the requesting District Attorney representative. The District Attorney shall then disclose the records to the defense under Penal Code section 1054, et seq., as required. The disclosure of confidential information is prohibited by Penal Code section 1054.2. d. After the District Attorney’s Office provides the notice in a case pursuant to subdivision (a) above, and the Sheriff’s Department provides responsive Evidence Audit Records, Remedy system printouts, and DRs related to a peace officer to the District Attorney’s Office pursuant to subdivision (c), the District Attorney’s Office may disclose these records to the defense in other cases under Penal Code section 1054, et seq. The parties agree that the terms of this stipulation will apply to the disclosure of these records in other cases. Disclosure of these records to anyone beyond those to whom initially disclosed within this stipulation shall be by further order of the Court. 5. It is the Sheriff’s Department’s position that the Evidence Audit Records are peace officer personnel records subject to the Pitchess process (Evidence Code sections 1043-1046, Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531); however, this stipulation is not an agreement by the other parties that the Evidence Audit Records are “peace officer personnel records” within the meaning of Evidence Code section 1043-1046 nor Pitchess and its progeny. Furthermore, even though the Public Defender does not agree that the Evidence Audit Records are “peace officer personnel records”, the Public Defender does agree, for purposes of this stipulation only, that the Evidence Audit Records shall be subject to the following protective order: Evidence Audit Records disclosed in relation to a criminal proceeding may not be used for any purpose other than the court proceeding in which they were obtained pursuant to applicable law. 6. Personal identifying information contained in the reports shall not be disclosed to a defendant or member of the defendant’s family, nor disseminated outside of the defense team, and may not be used for any purpose other than the court proceeding in which they were obtained pursuant to applicable law. For purposes of this order, “Personal identifying information” means a person’s address; telephone number, driver’s license number, social security number, place of employment, employee identification number, mother’s maiden name, protected health information, deposit account number, savings account number, or credit card number. 7. The parties stipulate that this Order may be considered a “standing order” and is applicable to all criminal proceedings in the Orange County Superior Courts. The Protective Order applies to the Evidence Audit Records, but not Remedy system printouts nor DRs. 8. This stipulation does not prevent any party from seeking records otherwise permitted under law. Any further requests would need to proceed in the normal course under law (i.e., discovery request, good cause showing for Pitchess, Subpoena duces tecum, Public Records Act request, etc.). 9. This Stipulation and Order will be effective upon signing by the appropriate judicial officer. SO STIPULATED: Dated: October ___, 2020 MARTIN SCHWARZ Interim Public Defender MARTIN SCHWARZ Interim Public Defender Dated: October 6, 2020 LEON J. PAGE, COUNTY COUNSEL LAURA D. KNAPP Supervising County Counsel Dated: October ___, 2020 TODD SPITZER, DISTRICT ATTORNEY ROBERT MESTMAN Assistant District Attorney ORDER The Court adopts the stipulation and makes it the Court’s Order. The Court finds good cause for the disclosure of these records. This Order shall remain in effect until modified by stipulation or further Order of the Court. SO ORDERED. Dated: 10/13/20 Judge of the Superior Court, County of Orange KIRK H. NAKAMURA [The dates 10/15/20, 6 and 10/13/20 are handwritten; KIRK H. NAKAMURA under the order is stamped. The stipulation (pages 2-5) is set on pleading paper with the footer "STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING DISCLOSURE OF EVIDENCE AUDIT RECORDS AND ASSOCIATED REPORTS" and a page number, not transcribed.]
Superior Court of California County of Orange Chambers of KIRK H. NAKAMURA PRESIDING JUDGE 700 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE WEST SANTA ANA, CA 92701 Administrative Order No 20/24 Procedure for Disclosure of Evidence Audit Records This Order establishes the procedure for the disclosure of evidence audit records in relation to a criminal proceeding. The Court adopts the stipulation entered by the Orange Count
Reviewer note: Composed 2026-09-29 (California T3 Orange build 2026-09-29) from BenchPath custody ca/t3/ca-orange/docs/administrative_order_20_24_procedure_for_disclosure_of_evidence_audit_records.pdf (817933 bytes, sha256 294951066309da543956e8388fd7e7c4b886a6f6349857d26fda27b3b5561ce4; 5 pages) - the court's own posted PDF, a scan: transcribed by eye from the rendered page images, every page read against the image; a local machine reading (RapidOCR) served only as a second reader for a word-level diff, every difference classified and checked on the page; every quotation mark, apostrophe and dash checked in full-resolution crops; file stamps, handwritten dates and pages not transcribed are recorded in bracketed notes; printed irregularities are kept as printed. Posted on the court's Criminal & Traffic COVID-19 Response page; the order is a standing order for all criminal proceedings until modified, and the juvenile court's Administrative Order A-100-1-2021 (carded) incorporates it.
9 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-10.
6 verbatim requirements from 4th Circuit Administrative Order 1997-13.