Galland pleaded guilty to drug offenses after the trial court denied his motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a warrant based on information provided by a confidential informant. The magistrate had sealed the affidavit supporting the warrant in order to protect the informant’s identity. Galland’s motions to discover the sealed materials, quash the warrant, and to suppress the evidence were denied without the court first conducting an in-camera review of the sealed materials. The appellate court here reversed the denial of the motions. The trial court abused its discretion in failing to examine in camera the sealed affidavits of probable cause before ruling on the motions. The California Supreme Court in People v. Hobbs (1994) 7 Cal. 4th 948 held that a defendant’s right to due process can be balanced against the informant’s right to privacy by an in camera review procedure. The trial court had no discretion to forego the in camera review necessitated by Galland’s motions.