Smith v. Super. Ct.
The court has read and considered the petition for writ of mandate and the informal response filed by the Attorney General. The Attorney General concedes that petitioner is entitled to the appointment of an attorney. Given this concession, this court may grant relief without issuance of an alternative writ or an order to show cause. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1088; Palma v. U.S. Industrial Fasteners, Inc. (1984) 36 Cal.3d 171, 178-179.) Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandate is granted.
Petitioner filed a written request with the trial court stating that he is presently confined for an offense he did not commit, that deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) testing is relevant to his assertion of innocence, that he is indigent, and that he has not previously requested appointment of counsel to pursue a motion for DNA testing. Therefore, he has stated a prima facie basis for appointment of counsel, and the court was required by Penal Code section 1405, subdivision (b)(1), to appoint an attorney to prepare a motion for performance of DNA testing.
Comments on Smith v. Super. Ct.