In People v. Chen (1974) 37 Cal.App.3d 1046, defendant was questioned on homicides in San Francisco after appointment of counsel on Oakland burglary charges; the court said the officer had no information counsel was appointed in Oakland nor that such counsel might represent defendant on the San Francisco charges. Accordingly, the intelligent waiver of counsel's presence was permissible. That case focused on the information available to the officer, although that consideration was found irrelevant in the post-indictment Massiah v. United States (1964) cases, and although the purpose of the Massiah rule is not to deter any police illegality, but rather to shore up the attorney's ability to make the best possible defense.