People v. Kirk CA1/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 11, 2014A138871California2,808 words

Opinion

Opinion

Banke, J.

INTRODUCTION

Lynwood Allan Kirk appeals his conviction, following a no contest plea, of kidnapping (Pen. Code, § 207, subd. (a))1 and infliction of corporeal injury on a cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)). He maintains the trial court erred by not thoroughly inquiring about and subsequently denying his Faretta2 motion, failing to conduct a thorough Marsden3 motion, and denying his motion for continuance.4 We conclude none of these claims have merit, and affirm the judgment.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 808 (Faretta). 3 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden). 4 Defendant also maintained in his opening brief he was entitled to additional custody credits. In his reply brief, he acknowledged “[h]aving obtained the relief sought in the Opening Brief” after filing a section 1237.1 motion in the trial court, and therefore “[withdrew] this claim” even though he “[was] not and has never been in agreement with the credits.”

PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

We set forth only those facts pertinent to the issues raised on appeal. The San Mateo County District Attorney charged defendant with seven counts arising…

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.