The People v. Peck CA5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 27, 2013F064868California4,808 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

In People v. Peck (Oct. 21, 2011, F061314) [nonpub. opn.], this court remanded appellant Curtis Daniel Peck’s case for a hearing pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden) because Peck had indicated dissatisfaction with counsel and the trial court failed to conduct a hearing. This appeal is from the trial court’s denial of his Marsden motion after remand. Peck contends the trial court failed to make a satisfactory inquiry of his complaints and failed to determine whether his trial counsel properly advised him. We reject his contentions and affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

On June 15, 2010, a homeowner found that his home had been burglarized and personal belongings taken. The homeowner saw Peck sitting in a vehicle outside his (homeowner’s) home and approached; the homeowner saw one of his personal items in Peck’s car. Peck fled, leaving the car behind when it got stuck.1 Also on that day, another homeowner noticed that her home had been burglarized, personal property taken, and her car stolen. Peck was driving the stolen car when police began pursuit, the car overheated, and Peck was apprehended. Officers found stolen property…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.