Marks

Marks v. Superior Court

Good Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 674·2002 Cal. LEXIS 275·2002 Daily Journal DAR 953·27 Cal. 4th 176·38 P.3d 512
Supreme Court of CaliforniaJanuary 28, 2002S085224California8,046 words

Opinion

Opinion

Brown, J.

Appeal from a judgment of death is automatic. (Pen. Code, § 1239, subd. (b).) If, as in most cases, the defendant is indigent, this court will appoint counsel to prosecute the appeal. (Id., § 1240.1.) Until 1998, appointed counsel’s obligations also included “a duty to investigate factual and legal grounds for the filing of a petition for writ of habeas corpus.” (Cal. Supreme Ct., Policies Regarding Cases Arising from Judgments of Death, policy 3, former std. 1-1; see In re Sanders (1999) 21 Cal.4th 697, 717-718 [ 87 Cal.Rptr.2d 899 , 981 P.2d 1038 ]; see also In re Anderson (1968) 69 Cal.2d 613 [ 73 Cal.Rptr. 21 , 447 P.2d 117 ].) Since 1998, the court’s policies have alternatively provided for the appointment of separate counsel to represent death penalty defendants on direct appeal and in habeas corpus/ executive clemency proceedings. We issued an order to show cause in this matter to clarify the authority of habeas corpus counsel to participate in the correction, augmentation, and settlement of the record on appeal. Having assessed considerations of both policy and practicality, we conclude that, should the timing of the appointment permit, habeas corpus counsel may…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.