PEOPLE v. HERRERA



















Filed 7/1/10











IN
THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA







THE PEOPLE, )

)

Plaintiff and Respondent, )

) S171895

v. )

) Ct.App. 4/3 G039028

HONORIO MORENO HERRERA, )

) Orange County

Defendant and Appellant. ) Super.
Ct. No. 05CF3817

__________________________________ )



STORY CONTINUE FROM
PART I….







Although acknowledging that the trial court had no
power to compel the witness's appearance at trial (Sandoval, supra, 87
Cal.App.4th at p. 1434), Sandoval
found it highly significant that the United States and Mexico
had a treaty, which became effective in 1991, providing for cooperation in the
prosecution of crimes and mutual assistance in obtaining witness
testimony. ( >Sandoval, at pp. 1439-1440.) Specifically, the treaty outlined several
cooperative methods by which a Mexican resident's testimony could be obtained,
either in California or in Mexico. (Id. at p. 1439.)^[1] This
development sufficiently distinguished the situation in Sandoval from that which existed in 1972 when >Mancusi observed that the United States had not yet
made agreements with foreign countries similar to the interstate agreements
found in Barber. (Sandoval, supra, 87
Cal.App.4th at p. 1440.) Because
the treaty with Mexico represented such an agreement, the prosecution's failure
to pursue any of the cooperative methods outlined in the treaty was fatal to
its showing of good faith:
â€