SUPREME COURT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF CALIFORNIA   F I L ,E

FEB 4 7 2007

Frederick K. Ohirich Clerk

In re ALFREDO REYES VALDEZ   )

} 5107508 on Habeas Corpus.   }

THE COURT:

In the matter of Alfredo Reyes Valdez on Habeas Corpus, 5107508 (Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, No. KA007782), good cause appearing, the court orders the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles to select a judge of that court to sit as a referee in this proceeding, and to promptly notify this court of the referee selected. After appointment by this court, the referee, after proper notice to the parties, is directed promptly to hold an evidentiary hearing and to make findings on the following questions:

1. Why did petitioner's trial counsel not introduce evidence at the guilt phase of the trial that the blood on the pants seized from the Monte Carlo automobile had been tested by the prosecution and found not to have come from the victim and did this reason constitute a reasonable tactical choice by trial counsel?

2. Why did petitioner's trial counsel not attempt to introduce at the guilt phase of the trial the proffered evidence regarding Liberato Gutierrez to show that Gutierrez may have murdered and/or robbed the victim and did this reason

constitute a reasonable tactical choice by trial counsel?

3. Did petitioner's trial counsel provide ineffective assistance of counsel by failing to adequately investigate and present evidence in mitigation during the penalty phase as alleged in subclaim 11 of the petition?

4. Why did petitioner's trial counsel not attempt to introduce at the penalty phase of the trial the proffered evidence regarding Liberato Gutierrez to show that Gutierrez may have murdered and/or robbed the victim and did this reason

constitute a reasonable tactical choice by trial counsel?

It is further ordered that the referee prepare and submit to this court a report of the proceedings conducted pursuant to this appointment, of the evidence adduced, and of the findings of fact made.

Any requests for discovery in this matter should be addressed to the referee. (See In re Scott (2003) 29 Cal.4th 783, 814.)