What is the effect of section 27706(a) of the California Criminal Code on the appointment of a public defender to defend a defendant in an appeal from a misdemeanor conviction?

It also stated: "There are sound policy reasons which support California's scheme of limiting the number of appellate cases assigned to the county public defender. Many county public defender offices lack staff trained in appellate advocacy. These offices, seeking to operate in an era of reduced funding, are all too often struggling to maintain sufficient staff with which to provide adequate representation to indigents. Adding the burden of indigent appeals from misdemeanor convictions might well be the straw that breaks the back of our present system of providing counsel from county public defenders' offices to indigents at the trial level." ( Erwin v. Appellate Department , supra , 146 Cal.App.3d at p. 719, 194 Cal.Rptr. 328.)

[41 Cal.App.5th 1145]

Thereafter, in Mowrer v. Appellate Department , supra , 226 Cal.App.3d 264, 276 Cal.Rptr. 38, the same panel held that section 27706(a) did not authorize the appellate department to compel the public defender to represent a defendant in any appeal from a misdemeanor conviction even when the public defender refused to state a belief that the appeal would result in reversal or modification of the judgment. It explained that "the first sentence of this statute authorizes the trial court to order the appointment of the public defender at the trial phase of the case; however, the second sentence, in which appeals are discussed, makes no mention of any judicial power to appoint." ( Id. at p. 267, 276 Cal.Rptr. 38.) It further explained that the second sentence was intended to give the public defender discretion to prosecute appeals, but it did not authorize a court to

[255 Cal.Rptr.3d 24]

compel the public defender to do so. ( Id. at pp. 267-268, 276 Cal.Rptr. 38.)