Legal Opinion

Corenevsky v. Superior Court

California Supreme Court

Decided July 5, 1984No. Docket Nos. L.A. 31723, 31724, 31722PublishedCited by 78 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

MOSK, J.

In these three consolidated cases we address claims regarding the necessity, funding and enforcement of court-ordered ancillary defense services for indigent defendants. The issues have been briefed by all three parties with fervor: not one supplemental brief, petition, or letter to the court has escaped speedy and spirited response by opposing counsel.

Petitioner Corenevsky, an indigent criminal defendant, requests a writ of mandate to review superior court orders denying him state-funded ancillary defense services and the assistance of a second appointed counsel. He also…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. United States v. CronicSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  3. McMann v. RichardsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  4. Denham v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. People v. PopeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979

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

3Cited by78 opinions

  1. People v. CooperCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  2. People v. SamayoaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1997
  3. People v. GuerraCalifornia Supreme Court · 2006
  4. People v. PanahCalifornia Supreme Court · 2005
  5. People v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1992

73 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