Coleman

People v. Coleman

Good Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 2d 800·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1098·9 Cal. App. 4th 493·92 Daily Journal DAR 12605·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7770
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 1992A052560California1,255 words

Opinion

Opinion

Perley, J.

Aaron Maurice Coleman (appellant) appeals from a judgment of conviction upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187). The jury also found that appellant was an ex-felon in possession of a firearm and that he had suffered two prior convictions (Pen. Code, §§ 12021, 667, 667.5, subd. (b)). We reverse the judgment because the trial court failed to grant a mistrial on the ground of legal necessity.

Factual Background

Following defense counsel’s opening statement and after one of the People’s witnesses had begun testifying, appellant moved to substitute counsel pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 [ 84 Cal.Rptr. 156 ,465 P.2d 44], Appellant told the court that he wanted new counsel appointed because his defense counsel had misstated the evidence in her opening statement. He also said that if he testified, the jury would perceive him as a liar because of defense counsel’s statement. In a further hearing on the Marsden motion, defense counsel objected to the Marsden motion and urged the court to grant a mistrial arguing that a mistrial was the appropriate remedy given her misstatement of the evidence in the opening statement.…

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.