Kirvin

Does a trial court abuse its discretion in denying a criminal defendant the right to represent himself when he has repeatedly refused to come to court and be interviewed by a court-appointed mental health expert? Is a defendant who makes six separate telephone calls urging a relative to persuade the prosecution’s chief witness not to testify at trial entitled, under People v. Bailey (1961) 55 Cal.2d 514 [ 11 Cal.Rptr. 543 , 360 P.2d 39 ], to dismissal of all but one of his six convictions for attempting to dissuade a witness? The answer to both questions is no, and we affirm defendant Charles Kirvin’s convictions and, with one small correction, the 26-year prison sentence imposed in this case.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

I. Offense Conduct

A1 Jesse Cambell (Cambell) was driving defendant Charles Kirvin (Defendant) and others from Palmdale to Inglewood, California. Defendant and Cambell were dating. Upset with how Cambell was eating candy, Defendant punched her in the right eye so hard it bled. Defendant told Cambell he would hurt her family if she told anyone who hit her; he subsequently drove her to a nearby police station and hospital where she reported that she was…