California Court of Appeal· 8/21/1980

People v. Worthy

Citations

109 Cal. App. 3d 514
167 Cal. Rptr. 402
1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2182

How courts have described this case

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

concluding that, upon a proper showing of necessity, trial court must provide an indigent defendant expert services, without regard to whether his counsel is appointed or pro bono
concluding that, upon a proper showing of necessity, trial court must provide an indigent defendant expert services, without regard to whether his counsel is appointed or pro bono
concluding that, upon a proper showing of necessity, trial court must provide an indigent defendant expert services, without regard to whether his counsel is appointed or pro bono
defendant represented by private counsel constitutionally entitled to publicly funded experts if defendant showed indigency and necessity
defendant represented by private counsel constitutionally entitled to publicly funded experts if defendant showed indigency and necessity
legislative purpose of amendments to insanity-defense statutes was to simplify issue for jury

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Woods

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

21 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named People v. Worthy

21 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.