Is there any state action which deprived a defendant of his right to a fair and impartial trial?

'It is next contended that because there was no procurement of or active participation by the law enforcement agency in [the informant's] removal from the jurisdiction there was no state action which deprived the defendant of due process of law. The record does indicate that the police did not arrange for [the informant's] absence. The critical question, however, is not necessarily one of improper conduct in bringing about [the informant's] absence, but rather, whether the defendant's conviction resulted from some form of trial in which his essential rights were disregarded or denied. We are persuaded that the circumstances surrounding this prosecution affected and militated against the defendant's right to a fair and impartial trial.' (53 Cal.2d at 753, 3 Cal.Rptr. at 4, 349 P.2d at 676.)

Similarly, in Penney v. Superior Court, supra, 28 Cal.App.3d 941 at 953, 105 Cal.Rptr. 162 at 171, we said: