MICHAEL P. JUDGE, PUBLIC DEFENDER

Kathy Quant, Deputy Public Defender

Appellate Division

State Bar No. 118603

320 West Temple Street, Suite 590

Los Angeles, Ca. 90012

(213) 974-3098

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

IN RE REYES SANCHEZ SALCIDO, .................................Case No. BH001118

ALEJANDRO CORONA, NELLY CISNEROS, ..................(Filed in connection with L.A.Sup

JORGE SILVA BARATO, RAMON PEREZ, ........................Court Case Numbers:

AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10,000, .......................................BA159367, BA162772, BA157012,

WHO ARE KNOWN BUT UNNAMED ...............................BA132514, BA156928.)

PERSONS WHO ARE, HAVE BEEN, OR

WILL BE REPRESENTED BY THE

LOS ANGELES COUNTY

PUBLIC DEFENDER,

............................................................Petitioners.

AMENDED

PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE LARRY FIDLER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, JUDGE DESIGNATED PURSUANT TO PENAL CODE SECTION 629.50:

Petitioners, by and through their attorney, Michael P. Judge, Public Defender for the County of Los Angeles, and Kathy Quant, Deputy Public Defender, hereby amend their Petitioner for Writ of Habeas Corpus to add the following:

On June 1, 1998, District Attorney Gil Garcetti admitted the failure to provide notice, inventory, transcripts, as well as copies of the interception orders and applications, as required by Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70, in 58 pending or closed criminal prosecutions.

A copy of the press release of the Los Angeles County District Attorney is attached hereto

as Exhibit A and made a part of this petition.

Counsel for petitioners has received notice of the identities of those persons which the District Attorney has admitted are entitled to the relief sought in this petition. Those previously unnamed petitioners, whose names and identities have always been known by the Office of the Los Angeles District Attorney and/or their agents, and who are now know to both parties are as follows: Alejandro Corona (BA162772), Nelly Cisneros (BA157012), Jorge Silva Barato (BA132514), Ramon Perez (BA156928).

III

Deputy District Attorney Maria Ramirez has informally advised Deputy Public Defender Thomas Moore that a wiretap is involved in the prosecution of named Petitioner Reyes Sanchez Salicido (BA159367).

Based on police reports and evidence revealed through discovery, counsel for petitioners allege that the following defendants have been denied their rights to notice and disclosure of electronic surveillance pursuant to Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70: Jorge Rodriguez (BA129352), Ariel Hernandez (BA166582), Oscar Martin Sanchez (BA111830), Teresa Acosta (BA158245), Prisilla Davis (TA038458), Rosendo Morales (BA160261), Efren Tapia (BA088009),

Carlos Ramirez (BA095853).

The named petitioners are being denied their rights under Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70, the People having failed to provide the requisite inventory, order, application, and transcripts of intercepted communications prior to the introduction of evidence derived from those wiretaps at a hearing, trial, or proceeding. Petitioner are therefore entitled to immediate relief by this court.

Los Angeles County District Attorney Gil Garcetti’s admission of violations of constitutional and statutory state and federal laws in 58 cases, of which only 4 involve the rights of petitioners, are only the tip of the iceberg. Reports from the California Attorney General disclose that there were 151,229 people in Los Angeles County whose conversations have been intercepted, monitored, taped and are required to be stored for the next 10 years, in 1997 alone. (Exhibit B and C.)

While petitioners will obviously comprise only a fraction of those people who entitled to notice their numbers, aggregated over the last 10 years, are well in excess of the 58 the District Attorney has unilaterally chosen to reveal.

The District Attorney, his agents and representatives, as well other law enforcement agencies working in conjunction therewith, are aware of continuing violations against those persons who are entitled to notice and/or disclosure and are aware of the names of the petitioners who have not been provided with such notice. As such, petitioners are entitled to the relief sought in the petition now before this court.

WHEREFORE petitioners respectfully pray:

1. That this court to grant the relief sought and order the People to comply with Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70 as to those petitioners who they have admitted are entitled to notice and to deliver to petitioners’ attorney, Kathy Quant, Deputy Public Defender, at 320 West Temple Street, Suite 590, Los Angeles, California, the following:

A) An inventory of the seizure of their communications, which shall include all of the following:

1. The fact of the entry of the order.

2. The date of the entry and the period of authorized interception.

3. The fact that during the period wire, electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications were or were not intercepted.

B) A copy of the original signed and dated court order which authorized the interception.

C) A copy of the original signed and dated application and affidavit under which the interception was authorized.

D) A transcript of the contents of any intercepted wire, electronic digital pager, electronic, or cellular telephone communication from which any evidence was derived.

2) For such other and further relief as this court may deem just and proper.

MICHAEL P. JUDGE, PUBLIC DEFENDER

OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

By ______________________________

KATHY QUANT

Deputy Public Defender

VERIFICATION

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )

) ss.

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES )

I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury as follows:

I am an attorney at law, duly licensed to practice in all the courts of California, and I am employed as a Deputy Public Defender for the County of Los Angeles.

In this capacity, I represent petitioners in the foregoing petition for writ of habeas corpus and I make this verification as their attorney acting on their behalf in that the allegations made therein are more within my knowledge than theirs.

I have read the foregoing petition and know it is true based on the previously filed petition and the attached exhibits, and to the extent that any allegation is based on information and belief, I declare that I have been so informed and do so believe such information.

Executed this 5^th day of June, 1998, at Los Angeles, California.

_________________________________

KATHY QUANT

Deputy Public Defender

MICHAEL P. JUDGE, PUBLIC DEFENDER

Kathy Quant, Deputy Public Defender

Appellate Division

State Bar No. 118603

320 West Temple Street, Suite 590

Los Angeles, Ca. 90012

(213) 974-3098

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

IN RE REYES SANCHEZ SALCIDO, )Case No. BH001118

ALEJANDRO CORONA, NELLY CISNEROS,)

JORGE SILVA BARATO, RAMON PEREZ, )PROPOSED ORDER FOR

AND DOES 1 THROUGH 10,000, )COMPLIANCE WITH PENAL

WHO ARE KNOWN BUT UNNAMED )CODE SECTION 650 ET.SEQ

PERSONS WHO ARE, HAVE BEEN, OR ).

WILL BE REPRESENTED BY THE )

LOS ANGELES COUNTY )

PUBLIC DEFENDER, )

)

Petitioners. )

)

GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, it is hereby ordered that, as to each of those petitioners who the People have admitted are entitled to notice, that the People to comply with Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70 and to deliver to petitioners’ attorney, Michael P. Judge, Public Defender for Los Angeles County, and Kathy Quant, Deputy Public Defender, at 320 West Temple Street, Suite 590, Los Angeles, California, on or before June 17, 1998, or show cause why such delivery should not be made, the following:

1) An inventory of the seizure of their communications, which shall include all of the following:

A. The fact of the entry of the order.

B. The date of the entry and the period of authorized interception.

C. The fact that during the period wire, electronic digital pager, or electronic cellular telephone communications were or were not intercepted.

2) A copy of the original signed, dated, stamped court order authorizing interception and authorizing any extension of the original order.

3) A copy of the original signed, dated, stamped application, including any affidavits or other evidence or documents submitted therewith, under which an interception order or extension order was authorized.

4) A transcript of the contents of any intercepted wire, electronic digital pager, electronic, or cellular telephone communication from which any evidence introduced or intended to be introduced into any trial, hearing, or other proceeding was derived, or from which any evidence used to obtain a search warrant, arrest warrant, or interception order was derived.

Dated:

________________________________________

JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES