Smith v. Super. Ct.
Annotate this CasePetitioner Shaun Smith, as an indigent defendant representing himself in propria persona (pro. per.) in a pending criminal action, petitioned for a writ of mandate, prohibition, or other appropriate relief (petition) against respondent Sacramento County Superior Court, challenging respondent’s policies and procedures pertaining to pro. per. defendants then in effect. Petitioner’s took issue with the duties respondent had assigned to the pro. per. coordinator -- an individual hired and supervised by, and subject to the control and direction of, Sacramento County (the county). Though respondent revised its policies and procedures pertaining to pro. per. defendants in response to the Court of Appeals' order to show cause, the revisions were not, in Petitioner's estimation, sufficient. "When we consider the nature of those duties delegated to the pro. per. coordinator, as provided in respondent’s revised policies and procedures," the Court of Appeal concluded respondent impermissibly delegated its judicial powers in contravention of the separation of powers clause of the California Constitution. The writ of mandate issued, and respondent was directed to cease and desist from applying and implementing the pertinent portions of its revised pro. per. policies and procedures, and directing respondent to revise those policies and procedures again.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.