Spencer

People v. Spencer

Caution
153 Cal. App. 3d 931·1984 Cal. App. LEXIS 1838·200 Cal. Rptr. 693
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 28, 1984F002084California5,143 words

Opinion

Opinion

Hanson, J.

Appellant, who was allowed to act as cocounsel during his trial before a judge without a jury, seeks reversal of the judgment of conviction because the trial court failed to secure a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to counsel. In the alternative, appellant claims that if in fact he was represented by counsel and not acting in propria persona, the judgment should be reversed because of the ineflectiveness of trial coun sel. Because appellant’s first contention is meritorious, the case is reversed. We need not reach the second question.

Stanley Duane Spencer was found guilty in count one of a violation of Penal Code section 211, robbery; it was further found that in the commission of the offense, appellant personally used a handgun within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.5. Appellant also was found guilty of count two, possession of a firearm by an ex-felon in violation of Penal Code section 12021.

At arraignment, appellant, appearing with retained counsel Joe Lopes, entered pleas of not guilty to the crimes charged and denied the prior convictions. Trial was set and the date continued once. Before the trial date appellant waived jury trial, and…

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.