# Sandoval v. Superior Court

> California Court of Appeal · September 13, 1972 · 27 Cal. App. 3d 741

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9729771

## Case

- **Full name:** CARLOS SANDOVAL, JR., Et Al, Petitioners, v. THE SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY, Respondent; THE PEOPLE, Real Party in Interest
- **Court:** California Court of Appeal
- **Decided:** September 13, 1972
- **Citations:** 27 Cal. App. 3d 741; 104 Cal. Rptr. 157; 1972 Cal. App. LEXIS 889
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Cobey
- **Judges:** Ford, Cobey
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9729771

## Opinion text

COBEY, J.
I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in Adams v. Superior Court, 2d Civ. No. 40086, ante, page 719 [ 104 Cal.Rptr. 144 ].
I also note that in the record of this case there is additional evidence *745 indicating that the Central District of the Los Angeles County Superior Court is predominantly a low-income high minority group area and the effect of the change in the method of selection of prospective trial jurors in criminal cases was discussed by the executive committee of the superior court following protest of the change. The record is silent, however, as to the content of the discussion.
A petition for a rehearing was denied October 10, 1972. Cobey, J., was of the opinion that the petition should be granted. Petitioners’ application for a hearing by the Supreme Court was denied November 9, 1972. Peters, J., and Mosk, J., were of the opinion that the application should be granted.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9729771. Public record. Not legal advice.