California can request live testimony from a material witness in another state through the Uniform Act, but a California subpoena alone does not compel that person to travel. The California court may certify why the witness is material and how many days are needed; the certificate must then be presented to a judge in the witness’s state, which decides under its own law whether to order attendance. The defense can request this process, but attendance, custody, and a continuance are not automatic. (Penal Code § 1334.3; People v. Cogswell)
Build the California request around material live testimony
Counsel should identify where the witness lives, what first-hand testimony the witness can provide, why it matters to an issue in the case, and how many days the person’s attendance will require. The California judge’s certificate identifies the other state and witness, certifies materiality, and states the time needed. Trial dates, travel, and the statutory witness-expense arrangements should also be addressed before a request is made. (Penal Code § 1334.3)
The certificate is not the final subpoena. It is presented to a judge in the county where the witness is found. That court follows the receiving state’s Uniform Act and decides whether the witness is material and necessary, whether attendance can be ordered, and whether the process creates undue hardship or requires protections. California Penal Code section 1334.2 describes a similar hearing when another state asks California to bring a witness here; it is an illustration of the separate receiving-state step, not a rule binding the witness’s state. Check that state’s own statute and court requirements. (Penal Code § 1334.2)
The other state can deny the request
In People v. Beardslee, the defense sought certificates for out-of-state witnesses, but the receiving court denied the requests after finding the witnesses were not necessary or material under its procedure. The case illustrates why a certificate from California does not guarantee that a witness will be compelled to attend. Keep the California application and certificate, the papers filed in the other state, the hearing record, and any ruling or hardship finding. (People v. Beardslee)
If attendance does not happen, do not assume the witness’s prior statement or testimony can simply be read to the jury. Unavailability, prior opportunity for cross-examination, and the diligence used to obtain attendance raise separate evidence questions. People v. Cogswell discusses the Uniform Act and distinguishes the interstate request from the later question whether prior testimony may be used. (People v. Cogswell)
Give counsel the witness’s location and contact information, expected testimony, supporting records, trial schedule, and travel concerns. The Law Offices of David S. Chesley represents people facing California criminal charges. Call (800) 755-5174 to discuss the witness and the proposed certificate.