Is there any case law where a trial court's conduct in appointing a public defender or private counsel was an abuse of power?

To hold that the trial court's conduct in the fact situation before us did not constitute an abuse of discretion would be to acquiesce in a state of affairs fraught with the opportunity for "capricious disposition or whimsical thinking" (Harris v. Superior Court, Supra, 19 Cal.3d 786, 796, 140 Cal.Rptr. 318, 567 P.2d 750). Here, there is a strong inference that the trial court was annoyed with the public defender for being late, and was not exercising the required "discriminating judgment" (Ibid.) in taking into consideration all the relevant factors that should have been a part of the decision as to whether to appoint the public defender or private counsel. ⁴