Garcia

In this case, the trial court required the self-represented defendant to serve subpoenas on his prisoner witnesses before they could be brought to court. Under our law, a witness incarcerated in state prison is brought to a criminal court to testify by means of a removal order issued pursuant to Penal Code section 2621 or 1567. The judge here would not issue removal orders for defendant’s witnesses due to his mistaken belief that defendant was first required to have subpoenas served on his witnesses within the prison—a hurdle defendant never overcame.

The error, however, was not prejudicial. Under the circumstances of this case, the denial of access to the witnesses did not amount to a violation of defendant’s constitutional right to present a defense. Only the state law standard of reversibility applies—the standard of People v. Watson (1956) 46 Cal.2d 818 [ 299 P.2d 243 ] (Watson)—and the error is harmless under that standard.

Defendant also claims the court’s denial of his final request for a continuance was reversible error. The request was based partly on defendant’s ongoing attempts to subpoena prisoner witnesses and partly on a claim that the prison had…