The Supreme Court will celebrate Cyber Monday by uploading to the court’s website its opinion in Riverside County Sheriff’s Department v. Stiglitz. 
The case raises this issue: Does the hearing officer in an administrative appeal of the dismissal of a correctional officer employed by a county sheriff’s department have the authority to grant a motion under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531? In April, the court asked the parties for supplemental briefing on these issues: (1) Assuming that a motion for discovery of officer personnel records may be filed in an administrative proceeding (Evid. Code, § 1043, subd. (a)), and a hearing officer has authority to determine that the motion states good cause for discovery (Evid. Code, § 1043, subd. (b)(3)), is there any existing statutory mechanism that would allow the matter to be transferred to the superior court for an in camera review of the records by a judicial officer (Evid. Code, § 1045, subd. (b))? (2) If no existing statutory mechanism applies, do we have the authority to create such a transfer mechanism?
Stiglitz is the last case from the September calendar without an opinion, and Monday is the last filing day within the 90-day period.
The opinion can be viewed Monday starting at 10:00 a.m.
