Douglas v. Superior Court
Filed 2/17/06 Douglas v. Superior Court CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| PHILLIP DOUGLAS, Petitioner, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF TUOLUMNE COUNTY, Respondent; HENRY SOLIZ, Real Party In Interest. | F049456
(Tuolumne Sup. Ct. No. CV50544)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of mandate.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Thomas D. McCrackin and Catherine A.J. Woodbridge, for Petitioner.
Bostwick & Janoff and Jeffrey D. Janoff, for Real Party in Interest.
-ooOoo-
Real party in interest, Henry Soliz (RPI) is or was an inmate in the custody of the California Department of Corrections (CDC). He filed a civil suit in Tuolumne County Superior Court in February 2004. Although the third amended complaint has not been attached as an exhibit, RPI apparently alleged petitioner, Phillip Douglas, a CDC guard, sexually assaulted him.
On November 8, 2005, RPI subpoenaed Internal Affairs Special Agent, Scott Moeszinger (Moeszinger) for a deposition to be held on December 7, 2005. Moeszinger was assigned to investigate RPI's 602 complaint filed with the CDC. The subpoena sought â€
