Under California Evidence Code § 1043 and the landmark California Supreme Court decision *Pitchess v. Superior Court* (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531, criminal defendants possess a statutory right to discover citizen complaints regarding officer misconduct, falsification of police reports, racial bias, and excessive force contained within the officer's confidential personnel file.
### 1. The Legal Standard: 'Good Cause' & Plausible Factual Scenario
Under *Warrick v. Superior Court* (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1011, your defense counsel must demonstrate 'good cause' via a sworn declaration establishing a **plausible factual scenario** of officer misconduct. This threshold is relatively low:
* The defense declaration (often filed under seal or on information and belief) must present a specific factual account that contradicts the officer's narrative in the arrest report.
* The alleged misconduct must be material to your pending defense (e.g., if you are charged with PC 148 resisting arrest, prior complaints of fabricating resisting charges or unprovoked force are directly material).
### 2. The 16-Court-Day Notice Requirement
Pursuant to California Evidence Code § 1043(a) and CCP § 1005, written notice of the Pitchess motion must be served on the prosecuting agency and the law enforcement department (e.g., LAPD or LASD Legal Affairs) at least **16 court days prior to the hearing** (plus additional days if served by mail).
### 3. The In-Camera Review Process
If the judge finds good cause:
1. The judge conducts a private, closed-door review (*in-camera* hearing) with the Police Department's custodian of records and city attorney present (defense and prosecution are excluded).
2. The custodian brings all internal affairs files and citizen complaints within the last 5 years.
3. The judge orders disclosure of the names, addresses, and phone numbers of previous complainants and witnesses who filed complaints of dishonesty or excessive force against that officer.
Once obtained, your defense investigator can interview those past complainants to establish a pattern of misconduct under Evidence Code § 1101(b) or impeach the officer's credibility at trial.