On appeal, how have the courts treated a motion to unseal a confidential attachment and quash a search warrant?

The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the trial court properly denied appellant's motion to unseal the confidential attachment and to traverse and quash the warrant. Where a defendant challenges a search warrant issued on the basis of confidential documents placed under seal, the trial court is required to conduct an in camera hearing. At that hearing, the trial court determines whether valid grounds exist for maintaining any confidential documents under seal. It also determines whether there is a reasonable probability the warrant was based on false statements and is therefore subject to a motion to traverse, and whether the sealed documents furnished probable cause for issuing the warrant. (People v. Hobbs, supra, 7 Cal.4th at pp. 971-975.)

Here, the trial court followed the proper procedure. We independently review the record, including any sealed materials, to determine whether its findings constituted an abuse of discretion. (People v. Martinez (2005) 132 Cal.App.4th 233, 241.) Our independent review confirms the trial court's determinations. We agree with the trial court that there are sufficient grounds for maintaining the confidentiality of the informant's identity, and that the extent of the sealing is

Page 3