People v. Birdon CA3

DISCUSSION

Prior to the date set for sentencing, defendant had filed what appears to be a form motion pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 for substitution of appointed counsel. Its allegations are not pertinent. At the scheduled hearing, the court continued the matter of sentencing and entertained the motion in camera.

We do not need to relate the substance of the hearing. At its conclusion, the trial court denied the motion. Defendant then immediately announced, “I wanted a Faretta motion to represent myself.” The court responded, “I’m not going to entertain that right now because a . . . motion to represent oneself has to be really unequivocal. And very often I see that when I deny a Marsden motion[,] [t]he immediate reaction is, well, if I can’t get a new attorney, I’ll just represent myself. So I want you to just think about it, but I’m very happy to entertain that motion on the day of sentence. [¶] If you want to represent yourself on the day of sentence, make sure you are prepared to go forward on that day.” (Italics added.) When defense counsel and defendant indicated that his desire to represent himself was based on his desire to file a motion for a new…