Leo F. Kreiling v. H. v. Field

Appellant, who conducted his own defense, and was convicted by a California state jury of two counts of obstructing telephones (Cal.Penal Code, § 591) and one count of burglary (Cal.Penal Code, § 459), appeals from an order of the district court denying a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Appellant claims that he did not intelligently waive counsel.

Counsel was appointed for appellant and he appeared at the preliminary hearing and at the arraignment. On the day set for trial appellant expressed his dissatisfaction with his attorney. At any time he might have had the services of the attorney originally appointed. The Court however would not appoint a substitute and defendant, against the advice of two judges, deliberately chose to represent himself, although as he stated “I don’t think I have the intelligence to represent myself.”

Now it is asserted that his waiver was not intelligent. Defendant knew that he had a right to a lawyer; he was emphatically warned not to be his own counsel; ******he was aware of the fact that he was charged with three felonies and that a conviction could result in long term imprisonment. He was furnished copies of the information and transcript of…