Can a defense expert's raw notes be disclosed to the prosecution?

[53 Cal.App.4th 488] Woods v. Superior Court (1994) 25 Cal.App.4th 178, 181, 30 Cal.Rptr.2d 182, upheld the compelled disclosure to the prosecution of "the results of standardized tests taken by a psychologist where the psychologist was identified as a defense expert, the psychologist relied on the test results in forming an opinion and his opinion was disclosed to the district attorney." Hines v. Superior Court, supra, 20 Cal.App.4th at pp. 1821-1824, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 712, required the production of a defense expert's raw written notes recording "factual determinations of the expert from observations made during an examination" (id. at p. 1823, 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 712), but not drafts of the final written report which reflect the expert's thought processes or initial conclusions, and not reports of non-testifying experts relied upon by the testifying expert. As discussed above, raw notes of the witness' words are not drafts expressing the report writer's thought processes, but themselves are witness "statements."