Legal Opinion

Keenan v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1982No. S.F. 24309PublishedCited by 123 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MOSK, J.

Maurice Keenan, an indigent defendant charged with a capital offense, seeks a writ of mandate to compel respondent superior court to grant his motion for public funds to pay for the services of a second attorney to assist iii the preparation of his defense. He relies on *427Penal Code section 987.9 as authority for this request.1 For the reasons that follow, we hold that the trial court abused its discretion in denying appointment of additional counsel but that the appointment should be made under section 987, subdivision (b), and that section 987.9’s provisions for confidentiality…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  3. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
  5. McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by123 opinions

  1. People v. DoolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
  2. People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1987
  3. People v. OchoaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
  4. People v. MarshallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  5. People v. AvilaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009

118 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API