Does a defendant need to show good cause for discovery?

contrary, a defendant must show good cause, but the burden is not high. Good cause for discovery exists when the defendant shows both materiality to the subject matter of the pending litigation and a reasonable belief that the agency has the type of information sought. (City of Santa Cruz v. Municipal Court (1989) 49 Cal.3d 74, 84, 260 Cal.Rptr. 520, 776 P.2d 222.) A showing of good cause is measured by relatively relaxed standards' that serve to insure the production for trial court review of all potentially relevant documents. (Ibid. )

[351 P.3d 1038]

(People v. Gaines (2009) 46 Cal.4th 172, 179, 92 Cal.Rptr.3d 627, 205 P.3d 1074.) The defense only needs to demonstrate a logical link between the defense proposed and the pending charge and describe with some specificity how the discovery being sought would support such a defense or how it would impeach the officer's version of events. (Id. at p. 182, 92 Cal.Rptr.3d 627, 205 P.3d 1074, quoting Warrick v. Superior Court (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1011, 1021, 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 2, 112 P.3d 2 ; see Warrick, at pp. 10241025, 29 Cal.Rptr.3d 2, 112 P.3d 2 [the defense proposed may, depending on the circumstances of the case, ... consist of a denial of the facts asserted in the police report].) This specificity requirement excludes requests for officer information that

[61 Cal.4th 721]