What is the test for direct supervision of a district attorney and sheriff?

What the court stated in People v. Brophy (1942) 49 Cal.App.2d 15, 120 P.2d 946, commenting on the same constitutional language as quoted in the above paragraph, is still good law: "Manifestly, 'direct supervision over every district attorney and sheriff and over such other law enforcement officers as may be designated by law' does not contemplate absolute control and direction of such officials. Especially is this true as to sheriffs and district attorneys, as the provision plainly indicates. These officials are [17 Cal.4th 369] public officers, as distinguished from mere employees, with public duties delegated and entrusted to them, as agents, the performance of which is an exercise of a part of the governmental functions of the particular political unit for which they, as agents, are active. [Citation.] Moreover, sheriffs and district attorneys are officers created by the Constitution.... [I]t is at once evident that 'supervision' does not contemplate control, and that sheriffs and district attorneys cannot avoid or evade the duties and responsibilities of their respective offices by permitting a substitution of judgment." (Id. at p. 28, 120 P.2d 946, italics added.) Indeed, because counties are political subdivisions of the state, they are frequently subject to state supervision; this does not nullify the responsibilities they bear or the autonomy they enjoy.