What is the test for making a showing for discovery of records of complaints against police officers?

Consistent with the rationale of criminal discovery, our high court has stated that the requisite showing for discovery "may be satisfied by general allegations which establish some cause for discovery other than 'a mere desire for the benefit of all information which has been obtained by the People in their investigation of the crime.' (Citation.)" (Pitchess v. Superior Court, 11 Cal.3d 531, 537, 113 Cal.Rptr. 897, 901, 522 P.2d 305, 309; Griffin v. Municipal Court, 20 Cal.3d 300, 306, 142 Cal.Rptr. 286, 571 P.2d 997.)

In Caldwell v. Municipal Court, 58 Cal.App.3d 377, 129 Cal.Rptr. 834, the court applied the foregoing principles in passing upon the adequacy of a defendant's showing for the production of complaints against police officers and police investigative records in the context of misdemeanor charges of battery on a police officer and obstructing an officer in the performance of his duties. The municipal court denied discovery and a petition for writ of mandate to the superior court was denied. On appeal from the superior court judgment, the reviewing court rejected the People's contention that the defendant had made an inadequate showing. The court stated: "The Attorney General argues that, in the present case, the showing in support of discovery was insufficient in that 'there is no allegation based on personal knowledge that the officers actually used excessive force or . . . that appellant is actually going to rely on a defense of self-defense.' But to require a personal showing by appellants would potentially involve interference with the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Even though the defense has not been able to point to specific prior acts of violence, the official records desired to be examined were identified with reasonable particularity and the pertinence to the defense of the requested information was demonstrated. The court should have granted discovery subject to the right of the public agency to assert privilege under[104 Cal.App.3d 698] Evidence Code section 1040." (Caldwell v. Municipal Court, supra, 58 Cal.App.3d 377, 380, 129 Cal.Rptr. 836.)

Page 830