King v. Superior Court

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• concluding that implied waiver of counsel by conduct is possible once the defendant “has been warned that he will lose his attorney if he engages in dilatory tactics”
• noting that most instances of even serious misconduct by a defendant can be dealt with by measures less severe than forfeiture of counsel
• forfeiture not appropriate where defendant assaulted and threatened counsel because trial court did not provide sufficient due process protections
• where fundamental constitutional right to counsel is at issue, proceeding to find forfeiture of that right requires procedural due process protections
• forfeiture not appropriate where defendant assaulted and threatened counsel because trial court did not provide sufficient due process protections
• defendant may forfeit right to counsel through violent conduct directed at counsel but forfeitures should be “last resort” and “should occur only after lesser measures to control defendant ... have failed.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).