Legal Question in Criminal Law in California

Re: Pc 987a Right To Counsel at Arraignment

While I sympathize with your concern that private lawyers are expensive, and in your case you claim you were entitled to a court-appointed lawyer and the court didn't appoint one for you, it is a fact of life that there is no such thing as a free lunch. While in a more perfect world legal services would be free, your argument is equally applicable to food, rent, health care, and gas. The more money you have, the better food, housing, transportation and health care you get, and it is the same for legal services. Most people who do get public defenders or other "free" counsel quickly find themselves under very intense pressure to plead guilty. In the case you mentioned, the defendant was able to assert his right to court-appointed counsel only after being convicted by a jury, sentenced to 42 years in prison, and doing maybe two or three years before his appeal could be decided. Good thing you have relatives willing to help out.

Re: Pc 987a Right To Counsel at Arraignment

If your are representing yourself good luck. The case you cited has been reversed by the California Supreme court. People v. Crayton (2002) 28 Cal.4th 346 [121 Cal.Rptr.2d 580; 48 P.3d 1136]. Although I did not carefully read the Sorhab case it appears that the issue was whether the court was required to readvise the defendant in superior court of his or her right to be represented by an attorney. The supreme court held that it was not necessary to readvise the defendant of his or her right to counsel unless the circumstances required it.