Legal Opinion
Gardner v. Appellate Div. of the Superior Court
California Supreme Court
Decided March 28, 2019No. S246214PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtOpinion of the Court by Kruger, J.
*1001 With the help of court-appointed counsel, a criminal defendant facing misdemeanor charges filed a successful motion *60 to suppress the prosecution's evidence against her. The prosecution appealed. The question is whether the defendant is entitled to the help of appointed counsel in responding to the prosecution's appeal of the suppression order. Based on article I, section 15 of the California Constitution, we conclude the answer is yes.
I
This case arises from the criminal prosecution of Ruth Zapata Lopez, who was charged by misdemeanor complaint with driving under the influence of alcohol (…
2Cases cited39 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Douglas v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Gardner v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2019
- Harmon v. Super. Ct.California Court of Appeal · 2026
- Lent v. Cal. Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- Lent v. California Coastal CommissionCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2021
- People v. Corrales CA2/6California Court of Appeal · 2021
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.