Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PART 2. OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE / PRELIMINARY PROVISIONS
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 686 (2026)

Preliminary Provisions

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In a criminal action the defendant is entitled:

1.To a speedy and public trial.

2.To be allowed counsel as in civil actions, or to appear and defend in person and with counsel, except that in a capital case he shall be represented in court by counsel at all stages of the preliminary and trial proceedings.

3.To produce witnesses on his behalf and to be confronted with the witnesses against him, in the presence of the court, except that:

(a)Hearsay evidence may be admitted to the extent that it is otherwise admissible in a criminal action under the law of this state.

(b)The deposition of a witness taken in the action may be read to the extent that it is otherwise admissible under the law of this state.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 133 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1936–2025 · leading case: Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Alabama v. Shelton, 535 U.S. 654 (2002). · cites it 2× “2d 227, 230 (1978) (Cal. Penal Code Ann. § 686 (West 1985) affords counsel to misdemeanor defendants); Del.”
Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806 (1975). · cites it 2× “See Cal. Penal Code §§ 686 (2), 686.1, 859, 987 (1970 and Supp.”
People v. Jackson, 618 P.2d 149 (Cal. 1980). · cites it 2× “I, § 15; Pen. Code, §§ 686, 1050; People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.”
People v. Mattson, 336 P.2d 937 (Cal. 1959). · cites it 4× “) The magistrate, and the superior court before arraignment, must ask defendant “if he desires the aid of counsel,” and if defendant desires and is unable to employ counsel, “must assign counsel to defend him.”
People v. Dent, 65 P.3d 1286 (Cal. 2003). · cites it 2× “(Pen.Code, §§ 686, subd. 2, 686.1, 859, 987, subd.”
People v. Mun. Court (Runyan), 574 P.2d 425 (Cal. 1978). · cites it 4× “"[T]he clause was not intended to relate to, and does not embrace, testimony given at the judicial proceeding known as a preliminary examination.”
Townsend v. Superior Court, 543 P.2d 619 (Cal. 1975). · cites it 4× “, Pen. Code, §§ 686, subd. 1, 1050, and 1381 et seq.”
People v. Cromer, 15 P.3d 243 (Cal. 2001). “I, § 15; Pen. Code, § 686.) This confrontation right seeks "to ensure that the defendant is able to conduct a `personal examination and cross-examination of the witness, in which [the defendant] has an opportunity, not only of testing the recollection and sifting the conscience…”
People v. Louis, 728 P.2d 180 (Cal. 1986). · cites it 2× “(Pen. Code, § 686; Evid. Code, § 1291, subd.”
People v. Kathy P., 599 P.2d 65 (Cal. 1979). · cites it 2× “I, § 15; Pen. Code, § 686; Tracy v. Municipal Court (1978) 22 Cal.”
People v. Giron-Chamul, 245 Cal. App. 4th 932 (Cal. Ct. App. 2016). “I, § 15; Pen. Code, § 686, subd. 3.) Although Giron-Chamul relies on both the federal and state Constitutions, we refer to the Sixth Amendment’s confrontation clause throughout because the state Constitution provides no more protection than the Sixth Amendment does.”
People v. Cudjo, 863 P.2d 635 (Cal. 1993). “I, § 15; Pen. Code, § 686.) Although the right of confrontation requires that an accused receive “an adequate opportunity to cross-examine adverse witnesses” (U.”
Show all 133 citing cases →
Cal. Penal Code § 686(1): 1 case
(DP) Catlin v. Davis, No. 1:07-cv-01466 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 17, 2019).
Cal. Penal Code § 686(3): 2 cases
John Adrian Dres v. Joseph Campoy, Warden, & Attorney Gen. of the State of California, 784 F.2d 996 (9th Cir. 1986).
People v. Andrade, 225 P.2d 289 (Cal. Ct. App. 1950).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.