When a party files a petition for review in the Supreme Court, an answer to the petition is normally optional. (See rule 8.500(e)(4) [specifying the time for filing “[a]ny answer to the petition” (emphasis added)].) Occasionally, however, the court takes away that option. At the beginning of the year, the court specifically requested an answer in one case. And it did so again last week.
In Goff v. Superior Court, the Court of Appeal summarily denied a writ petition that, according to Kate Moser in The Recorder, seeks to require a district attorney to run criminal checks on police officers who will be witnesses. The defendant petitioned for review and the Supreme Court told the Attorney General and/or the District Attorney that it’s expecting an answer to the petition, with “no requests for extension of time . . . contemplated.” What makes the court’s order particularly unusual is that it was issued the very day that the petition for review was filed.
