A judge did not issue a ruling Wednesday on a key evidence dispute in the case against Ashlee Buzzard, a Vandenberg Village mother facing a murder charge in the death of her 9-year-old daughter, Melodee.
Buzzard appeared in Santa Barbara County Superior Court in Lompoc, where the focus of the hearing was a motion from the defense seeking additional discovery tied to forensic evidence in the case.
The case dates back to October, when a school administrator with the Lompoc Unified School District reported concerns about the child’s prolonged absence from an independent studies program, prompting a multi-state investigation. Authorities later said the child’s remains were found in Utah.
Court documents previously obtained by KSBY News show investigators seized multiple electronic devices from Buzzard’s home during an initial search, evidence that could play a significant role as the case moves forward.
At Wednesday’s hearing, Buzzard’s attorney, Senior Deputy Public Defender Erica Sutherland, argued the defense still does not have all the materials needed to fully analyze the prosecution’s evidence.
“I filed a motion to compel a few weeks ago, seeking to obtain the forensic evidence behind the ultimate results that the prosecution witnesses have come to,” Sutherland said. “I made [an] informal request for those items in January. I still did not have them, so I filed my motion to compel.”
Sutherland said additional materials were turned over by prosecutors in recent days, but she believes key information is still missing.
“Last week, the prosecution disclosed some of that forensic evidence. My experts reviewed it, determined I was still missing quite a bit of information yesterday. I then received additional discovery from the prosecution,” she said.
In court, Senior Deputy District Attorney Jordan Lockey argued the prosecution has already provided more than what is legally required in terms of discovery. Sutherland disagreed, saying the defense has a right to access that information before trial.
“The prosecutor was arguing that the defense doesn’t have a right to pretrial discovery, that the right to discovery only attaches when an actual jury trial is set. That’s not what the law says,” Sutherland said.
The judge did not rule on the motion Wednesday and instead continued the matter to May 7 at 1:30 p.m., giving the defense time to review recently disclosed materials and identify what may still be outstanding.
Prosecutors told KSBY News the court has also tasked them with determining what has already been provided as part of the discovery process.
Sutherland said the ongoing review of evidence has impacted the timeline of the case.
“I’m anticipating we’ll be ready to do a preliminary hearing this summer,” she said.
A separate motion related to a search warrant challenge is scheduled for May 6 in Santa Maria.
