Legal Opinion
People v. Superior Court (Clements)
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 18, 1988No. A039899PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*494Opinion
ANDERSON, P. J.
In this petition for writ of mandate, the People challenge respondent court’s release of assets subject to forfeiture pursuant to Health and Safety Code section 11470 et seq. to enable defendants to secure private counsel.1 We consider the People’s challenge despite a contention that it is untimely. We conclude that the California statutory scheme authorizes forfeiture of even that property necessary for the retention of private counsel, and we hold that such retention is not prohibited by the constitutional right to counsel.
Section 11470 as amended in 1986 (Stats. 1986,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Branzburg v. HayesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Peterson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
- United States v. Richard H. ThierCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1987
- United States v. HarveyCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1987
- In Re Forfeiture Hearing As To Caplin & Drysdale, CharteredCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1988
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Portillo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1992
- Medo v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- People v. $30,000 United States CurrencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1995
- People v. Property Listed in Exhibit OneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- People v. $6,500 United States CurrencyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.