People v. Baltazar

Summary

The Colorado Supreme Court reviewed a district court order permitting a criminal defendant to seek ex parte subpoenas duces tecum and withhold certain resulting information from the prosecution. The court held that the defendant had no constitutional right to use subpoenas as a pretrial investigative tool or to bypass Colorado Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c)'s notice requirements, made the rule absolute, and remanded the case.

Holdings

1. The Colorado Supreme Court may exercise original jurisdiction under C.A.R. 21 because the district court's novel constitutional ruling had broad implications for criminal investigations and ordinary appellate review would be inadequate.
2. Colorado Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) does not permit a criminal defendant to obtain ex parte subpoenas duces tecum, to receive subpoenaed materials solely for the defendant's benefit, or to use subpoenas as a pretrial discovery or investigative tool.
3. The Fifth and Sixth Amendments do not give a criminal defendant a general constitutional right to conduct a secret pretrial search for evidence through ex parte subpoenas duces tecum.
4. Due process does not provide a general entitlement to investigate or obtain all potentially useful evidence; the recognized entitlement concerns evidence and witnesses constitutionally material and favorable to the accused.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure permit a defendant to obtain ex parte subpoenas duces tecum and exclusive pretrial access to subpoenaed information.
2. Whether the Fifth or Sixth Amendments constitutionally entitle a criminal defendant to use subpoenas duces tecum as an investigative tool without giving notice to the prosecution.
3. Whether the Colorado Supreme Court should exercise original jurisdiction under C.A.R. 21 to review the district court's order.

Disposition

writ_granted