People v. Spencer
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HANSON (P. D.), J.
Appellant, who was allowed to act as cocounsel during his trial before a judge without a jury, seeks reversal of the judgment of conviction because the trial court failed to secure a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel. In the alternative, appellant claims that if in fact he was represented by counsel and not acting in propria persona, the judgment should be reversed because of the ineflectiveness of trial coun sel. Because appellant’s first contention is meritorious, the case is reversed. We need not reach the second question.
Stanley Duane Spencer…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Johnson v. ZerbstSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCannSupreme Court of the United States · 1943
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- People v. CummingsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- People v. BloomCalifornia Supreme Court · 1989
- People v. JonesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
- People v. DoaneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- People v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.