Legal Opinion

People v. Stewart

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 22, 1985No. A024597PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

KLINE, P. J.

In People v. Fosselman (1983) 33 Cal.3d 572 [189 Cal.Rptr. 855, 659 P.2d 1144], our Supreme Court held that a trial court may consider inadequate assistance of trial counsel as a basis for a motion for a new trial. (Id., at pp. 582-583.) Because in that case the motion was presented by newly retained counsel (id., at p. 578), the Supreme Court was not obliged to concern itself with the conflict that usually will arise when a defendant unable to retain a new attorney requests the one who represented him at trial to argue his own incompetence as a ground for new trial. This…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. People v. MarsdenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  2. People v. PopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  3. People v. FosselmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
  4. In Re HallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1981
  5. People v. GibsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. People v. BolinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  2. People v. BarnettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. People v. DanielsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. People v. MemroCalifornia Supreme Court · 1995
  5. People v. HinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997

32 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