Legal Opinion

People v. Faxel

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 30, 1979No. Crim. 33423PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

THOMPSON, J.

This appeal from a conviction of robbery presents an issue apparently novel to the law of California. Involving a juxtaposition of the principles underlying Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 [45 L.Ed.2d 562, 95 S.Ct. 2525] and the constitutional right to effective representation, the matter at bench concerns the self-represented defendant’s right to state financed services ancillary to representation. In particular, this appeal raises the question of the nature of the showing that must be made by a self-represented defendant to require the appointment by the trial…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Charles Earl Brubaker v. Fred R. Dickson, Warden of the California State Prison at San Quentin, CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1962
  3. State v. KnappArizona Supreme Court · 1977
  4. Prudhomme v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Eugene Mason v. State of Arizona, A. E. Gomes, Superintendent, Arizona State Prison AtflorenceCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1975

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. People v. BlairCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Keenan v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  3. Corenevsky v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State v. CornellArizona Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Sand v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983

19 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