McDade

People v. McDade

Good Law
1991 Cal. App. LEXIS 483·230 Cal. App. 3d 118·280 Cal. Rptr. 912·91 Daily Journal DAR 5709·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3597
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 15, 1991B039902California3,199 words

Opinion

Opinion

Goertzen, J.

Vincent Todd McDade appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of two counts of first degree robbery (counts I and II) (Pen. Code, § 211), and a finding that he suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a), and three prior felony convictions within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). He contends the trial court committed prejudicial error when it denied defense counsel’s motions to be relieved, that appellant was denied the effective assistance of counsel, that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction on one robbery count, that he was deprived of adequate notice of the charges against him, that the jury was not properly instructed, that the court erred in denying appellant’s motion for a new trial and that the evidence was insufficient to establish the residential nature of appellant’s prior burglary conviction.

On October 18, 1988, following discussions in court about a possible plea, defense counsel asked that another attorney be appointed to represent appellant because the relationship of attorney and client had broken down. Counsel…

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.