People v. Ellis CA5

INTRODUCTION

This case analyzes the tensions that exist between a criminal defendant’s statutory right to a speedy trial (Pen. Code, § 1381)1 and his Sixth Amendment right to competent and adequately prepared trial counsel. Following a jury trial, appellant Orlando Jerome Ellis stands convicted of resisting an executive officer (§ 69) and misdemeanor battery on a parole agent (§ 243, subd. (b)). Prior to trial, appellant’s appointed counsel attempted to conduct a Pitchess2 hearing to discover information, if any, contained in the personnel file for the only witness against appellant, his parole officer. Despite proper service of notice, the Attorney General (the custodian of records) did not send a representative to the hearing. Defense counsel re-filed the Pitchess motion. At trial call (Department 1), defense counsel stated she was not ready to proceed to trial and wanted the Pitchess motion heard, which was scheduled for hearing in seven days. Appellant, however, refused to waive time. The court, without addressing defense counsel’s concerns regarding her lack of preparedness or the pending Pitchess hearing, directed the parties to the trial department. Later that same day,…