132 Cal. App. 2d 593 - People v. Simeone’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 1982 · most notably 57 Cal. 2d 89 - People v. Hughes (1961), State v. McFadden (1977)
26 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson · People v. Adamson · People v. Lanigan · In Re McCoy · 24 Cal. 2d 323 - In Re Egan
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““People v. Simeone, 132 Cal.App.2d 593 [ 282 P.2d 971 ], says (p. 597): ‘ [W]hen the court assigned the public defender to represent appellant, the accused had at hand one of the best equipped law offices in the state to champion his cause. It has a corps of vigorous, learned, amiable gentlemen who present their causes with force and intelligence.... Where a person accused of crime refuses to be represented by the Public Defender of Los Angeles County, and demands that some practicing lawyer leave his private practice in order to defend such accused, the latter prefers to have cause for a grouch rather than a chance to defeat his accusers. Because there are thousands of lawyers in Los Angeles County who would gladly suffer much inconvenience rather than see the constitutional right of an accused violated, is no reason why a defendant should be privileged to dawdle with the trial court, to neglect for four weeks to obtain counsel, and then have his conviction reversed because he did not choose to be represented by the public defender. ’ “And in People v. Williams, 174 Cal.App.2d 364 [ 345 P.2d 47 ], (p. 378) : ‘We perceive no grounds, legal or otherwise, why an accused should be permitted to refuse the services of the public defender, waive his right to counsel unless one of his choice is appointed, and then have his conviction reversed because he did not choose to be represented by the legal aid provided by the county. ’ “Again, in People v. Duncan, 175 Cal.App.2d 372 [ 346 P”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.