Canfield

People v. Canfield

Caution
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 140·2 Cal. App. 4th 1357·3 Cal. Rptr. 2d 825·92 Daily Journal DAR 1357·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 764
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 24, 1992F015277California1,520 words

Opinion

Opinion

Best, J.

Corinthians Canfield appeals from the judgment entered on a jury verdict convicting him of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664/187) and arson of an inhabited structure (§451, subd. (b)). After defendant was arraigned, he was adjudged incompetent to stand trial and criminal proceedings were suspended pursuant to section 1368. Before defendant was transferred to Atascadero, he filed a Faretta motion. The court denied the motion without prejudice because defendant had not served the district attorney. Several months later, defendant was certified competent and criminal proceedings were reinstated.

Defendant contends: (1) the trial court had no jurisdiction to rule on the Faretta motion; (2) if the court had jurisdiction, it was prejudicial error to deny the motion for the grounds stated without a hearing; and (3) the arson conviction must be stayed pursuant to section 654. We hold the court had jurisdiction to rule on the motion and did not err by denying it. In the unpublished portion of the opinion, we conclude the judgment must be modified to stay imposition of the sentence for arson; in all other respects we will affirm.

Facts

On August 4, 1989, defendant had a…

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.