Muszynski

People v. Muszynski

Good Law
100 Cal. App. 4th 672·122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 764·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4439·2002 Daily Journal DAR 8427·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6714
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 26, 2002H021243California4,779 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wunderlich, J.

I. Statement of the Case

Defendant Mark Stanislaw Muszynski appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of aggravated child endangerment (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a)), attempted murder (§§ 187, 664), and aggravated arson (§ 451.5, subd. (a)(3)) and found that he inflicted great bodily injury on the child (§§ 1203, subd. (e)(3), 12022.7, subd. (a)). On appeal he claims the trial court erred in denying a continuance so he could be represented by retained counsel or represent himself. He claims defense counsel was incompetent for not requesting an instruction on voluntary intoxication. He claims there is insufficient evidence to support the convictions for attempted murder and aggravated arson. He also claims the court erred in failing to appoint new counsel for the purpose of filing a motion for new trial on the ground of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

We conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support the conviction for aggravated arson, reverse the judgment, and remand for resentencing.

II. Facts

The primary witness against defendant was Anna Owczarska. At the time of trial, she was in custody for having left a drug treatment program.…

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.