pro se defense in California

5 California opinions name it 3 courts 1988–2016 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (6)

Case	Followed	Cited
Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate Districtgreen scotus · 2000 · cited in 4 California opinions naming this issue, 2005–2016 2 sentences 2016(See Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 145 L.Ed.2d 597 , 120 S.Ct. 684 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ] [“a defendant who represents himself virtually 2016(See Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 145 L.Ed.2d 597 , 120 S.Ct. 684 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ] [“a defendant who represents himself virtually	4	4
Faretta v. Californiagreen scotus · 1975 · cited in 4 California opinions naming this issue, 2005–2016 2 sentences 2016(See Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 145 L.Ed.2d 597 , 120 S.Ct. 684 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ] [“a defendant who represents himself virtually 2016(See, e.g., Faretta, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“It is undeniable that in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts.”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [“It is candidly recognized that a defendant who represents himself virtually never improves his situation or achieves a better result than would trained counsel”]; Martinez v. Court of Appeal (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an	4	4
People v. Riversgreen calctapp · 1993 · cited in 3 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2016 2 sentences 2016(See Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 145 L.Ed.2d 597 , 120 S.Ct. 684 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ] [“a defendant who represents himself virtually 2016(See Martinez v. Court of Appeal of Cal., Fourth Appellate Dist. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 145 L.Ed.2d 597 , 120 S.Ct. 684 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Rivers (1993) 20 Cal.App.4th 1040, 1051 [ 25 Cal.Rptr.2d 602 ] [“a defendant who represents himself virtually	3	3
People v. Blairgreen cal · 2005 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 1 sentence 2014(See Martinez v. Court of App. of 14 Cal. (2000) 528 U.S. 152, 161 [ 120 S.Ct. 684 , 145 L.Ed.2d 597 ] [“[o]ur experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by an experienced criminal defense attorney’”]; Faretta v. California, supra, 422 U.S. at p. 834 [“in most criminal prosecutions defendants could better defend with counsel’s guidance than by their own unskilled efforts”]; People v. Blair (2005) 36 Cal.4th 686, 740 [“‘the right of self-representation is a right that when exercised usually increases the likelihood	1	1
Godinez v. Morangreen scotus · 1993 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005(See Martinez, supra, 528 U.S. at p. 161 [“Our experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by *740 an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ” (fn. omitted)]; see also id. at p. 161, fn. 9 [acknowledging the view of some observers that allowing certain defendants to represent themselves at trial is akin to allowing them to waive their right to a fair trial]; see also id. at pp. 164-165 (conc. opn. of Breyer, J.); McKaskle v. Wiggins, supra, 465 U.S. at p. 177, fn. 8 [“the right of self-representation is a right that	1	1
McKaskle v. Wigginsgreen scotus · 1984 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 2005–2005 1 sentence 2005(See Martinez, supra, 528 U.S. at p. 161 [“Our experience has taught us that ‘a pro se defense is usually a bad defense, particularly when compared to a defense provided by *740 an experienced criminal defense attorney’ ” (fn. omitted)]; see also id. at p. 161, fn. 9 [acknowledging the view of some observers that allowing certain defendants to represent themselves at trial is akin to allowing them to waive their right to a fair trial]; see also id. at pp. 164-165 (conc. opn. of Breyer, J.); McKaskle v. Wiggins, supra, 465 U.S. at p. 177, fn. 8 [“the right of self-representation is a right that	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (1)

Case	Cited	Years
Berger v. O'HEARN green cal · 1953 2 sentences 1988Assn., supra, 41 Cal.2d 729 .) It has been suggested that the practice described is a tying arrangement which is also illegal under the pro se doctrine. 1988Assn., supra, 41 Cal.2d 729 .) It has been suggested that the practice described is a tying arrangement which is also illegal under the pro se doctrine.	1	1988–1988

Where else courts name it

IL 244 (1990–2026) FL 30 (1996–2022) SC 25 (1990–2026) NY 23 (1980–2021) WA 15 (1982–2025) TX 12 (1988–2016) AL 11 (1987–2018) PA 11 (1971–2024) MN 6 (1990–2018) IN 5 (2004–2024) CA 5 (1988–2016) MT 4 (1998–2014) VA 4 (1995–2024) CO 4 (2009–2019) GA 3 (2008–2023) NC 3 (1992–2004) MI 3 (1994–2015) MO 3 (1972–2016) LA 3 (1989–2008) MD 3 (1987–2010) AR 2 (2000–2001) WI 2 (1984–1992) OH 2 (1998–2020) IA 2 (2014–2026)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check